SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : The Enron Scandal - Unmoderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: KLP who wrote (402)1/17/2002 10:37:46 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 3602
 
Andersen Denies It Knew of Enron Problem

Thursday January 17, 9:55 pm Eastern Time

By Kevin Drawbaugh

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House denied on Thursday a senior Democrat's allegations that its 2001 energy plan was crafted to benefit Enron Corp., as auditor Andersen confirmed its executives discussed debt kept off the energy trading giant's books long before the deals triggered its collapse.

Houston-based Enron fired Andersen as its auditor, blaming it for destroying Enron documents government investigators were seeking for a probe into the energy trader's aggressive and murky bookkeeping, while the top U.S. securities regulator proposed tougher accounting oversight.

But Andersen denied that a memo about off-book debt meant the accounting firm knew about any improprieties, despite concerns over whether the auditor should have questioned Enron's finances further, or whether an Enron consulting contract that paid it $1 million a week in 2000 kept the accounting firm mum.

The White House on Thursday tried to distance itself from the widening scandal, denying its energy plan had been crafted to benefit Enron, President Bush's biggest political patron. A White House spokesman called a senior Democrat's report on the matter a ``waste of taxpayers' money.''

The White House also rebuffed repeated calls for the release of information about contacts between Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force and energy companies, including Enron.

NEW WATCHDOG PROPOSED

In response to the Andersen-Enron debacle, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Harvey Pitt called for a supervisory body with new powers that would eclipse those of the profession's present overseer.

``We initially envision a public body that will be

dominated by public members with two primary components -- discipline and quality control,'' Pitt said at an afternoon news conference. ``We are at the early stages of this proposal and many details remain to be worked out.''

Enron filed for the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history last month, throwing thousands out of work and leaving investors holding worthless shares in the once giant energy trader.

Pitt said he did not envision a new role for the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), a trade group that previously governed the profession on its own, conducting reviews and disciplining accounting firms.

Andersen has become embroiled in the Enron scandal following disclosures last week its employees destroyed thousands of Enron-related documents in recent months.

The Andersen memo, confirmed by the company, relates how a meeting of top managers had long discussions on Enron's myriad off-shore partnerships and moves to keep debt off its books. The memo also mentions ``conflicts of interest'' involving an Enron chief financial officer who ran some of the partnerships.

Andersen spokesman Charlie Leonard said the meeting described in the memo of Feb. 6 was simply a standard annual review of Enron. The executives discussed whether the auditor should retain Enron as a client, he said.

'NOTHING IMPROPER'

``Nothing in the meeting or the memo indicated that any illegal actions or improper accounting was suspected,'' Andersen said in a statement late on Thursday. ``It was not until (Enron executive Sherron) Watkins notified the firm ... that we became aware that individuals within Enron believed that there may have been accounting improprieties.''

On Wednesday, congressional investigators revealed that Andersen was warned of trouble at Enron last summer by an internal whistle-blower. In a conversation with an unidentified Andersen partner, Enron executive Sherron Watkins raised concerns about accounting problems with the off-balance-sheet partnerships that Andersen signed off on in February.

Watkins, a former Andersen employee, also telephoned a friend at the accounting firm, prompting another examination of its relationship with Enron. Andersen was assured by Enron that outside law firm Vinson & Elkins had been hired to investigate Watkins' concerns, said Leonard.

``She informed the audit team in Houston of her concerns and the audit team in Houston did exactly what they were supposed to do,'' said Leonard. ``They informed Enron's general counsel.''

Enron Chairman and Chief Executive Ken Lay said the directors decided to fire Andersen at a meeting on Thursday.

``We can't afford to wait any longer in light of recent events, including the reported destruction of documents by Andersen personnel and the disciplinary actions taken against several of Andersen's partners working in its Houston office,'' Lay said in a statement.

Andersen viewed the firing as moot, however.

``Our relationship with Enron ended when the company's business failed and it went into bankruptcy,'' said Andersen spokesman Patrick Dorton.

DEMOCRAT ALLEGES UNDUE INFLUENCE

The White House is eager to distance itself from the scandal surrounding Enron, which collapsed after trying to solicit aid from the Bush administration. The White House says it did nothing to help the company and did nothing wrong.

A report by California Rep. Henry Waxman, the senior Democrat on the House of Representatives' Government Reform Committee, found that at least 17 policies in the White House energy plan were advocated by Enron or benefited Enron.

The policies cited in Waxman's report include deregulation initiatives promoted by Enron, support for trading in energy derivatives and proposals to facilitate natural gas projects.

``This creates the unfortunate appearance that a large contributor received special access and obtained extraordinarily favorable results in the White House energy plan,'' Waxman wrote in a letter to Cheney, who headed the administration's energy task force.

OFF-BALANCE-SHEET TRANSACTIONS

Enron's use of off-balance-sheet transactions to keep debt off its books has come under scrutiny since the company collapsed late last year and filed for bankruptcy on Dec. 2.

In an example of how Enron tried to massage its earnings, Thursday's Wall Street Journal reported Enron claimed $110.9 million in profits from a short-lived venture that sharply limited losses from its once highly touted broadband unit.

As a result of the venture, broadband losses at Enron were limited to $67 million over two quarters. Enron claimed its broadband unit was promising, though still losing money, and in January 2001 said it would eventually generate $45 billion in revenues, which helped prop up its high-flying stock price.

Enron stunned analysts in October with its first quarterly loss in more than four years. Lumped in the third-quarter loss of $618 million were losses from that venture, which at its peak had about 1,000 test customers, many of whom did not pay for the service offering movies over telephone lines.



To: KLP who wrote (402)1/18/2002 5:22:02 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 3602
 
The Enron Story That Waited To Be Told

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 18, 2002; Page C01

Bethany McLean, a 31-year-old Fortune magazine reporter with an impossibly soft voice, decided to take a hard look at Enron last January.

The Houston energy company didn't like her questions. The CEO, Jeffrey Skilling, called her unethical and hung up on her. The chairman, Kenneth Lay, called Fortune's managing editor to complain. The chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow, flew to New York to tell McLean and her editors that Enron was in great shape.

McLean refused to be intimidated. "The company remains largely impenetrable to outsiders," she wrote in Fortune's March 5, 2001, issue. "How exactly does Enron make its money? Details are hard to come by because Enron keeps many of the specifics confidential. . . . Analysts don't seem to have a clue." All this amounted to a "red flag" that "may increase the chance of a nasty surprise."

The story sank without a trace. "At that point the coverage of Enron was pretty glowing," McLean says. After all, the stock had soared 90 percent the previous year and was selling for $76 a share.

Now that the company has collapsed amid charges of financial chicanery, devastating its employees' retirement funds, Enron is the hottest story in the country. Political reporters joined the fray after learning that Enron had sought help from the Bush White House. Teams of business journalists are digging into the largest corporate meltdown in American history.

But as in the savings and loan debacle a dozen years ago, it took news organizations too long to piece together the clues.

"It's fair to say the press did not do a great job in covering Enron," says Steve Shepard, editor-in-chief of Business Week magazine, which ran only briefs on the company's financial problems until a cover story in November. "Enron was really a systemic failure of all the checks and balances we have on corporate governance: integrity of management, board of directors, audit committee of the board, outside accounting firm, Wall Street analysts and ultimately the press. And all of us failed."

There were some notable early efforts. Last May, the Wall Street Journal ran a front-page story on Lay getting a half-hour meeting to lobby Vice President Cheney on the administration's energy program. The story noted that over the years Enron had donated nearly $2 million to President Bush, Lay's longtime friend, and that some top administration officials had worked for Enron.

"I feel pretty good about what we've done on Enron," says Alan Murray, the Journal's Washington bureau chief. "What we clearly did not understand was that it was heading for a disaster."

The problem, he says, is that such stories often turn on "arcane and technical" practices. "The press doesn't pay as much attention to some of these regulatory issues that have more impact on the world than the political issues we do pay attention to," Murray says.

If company auditors -- in this case, Arthur Andersen -- don't raise questions, "it's very hard to know where to look," says Larry Kramer, chief executive of CBS MarketWatch.com. "We didn't get a lot of rumblings. Our coverage was robust, but was still based on events after the fact."

A dramatic decline in stock is not necessarily a warning of foul play, says Kramer, noting that his own company went public at $97 a share and the stock is now worth $4. "People just got dazzled by the size of the business," he says of Enron.

David Morrow, editor of TheStreet.com, says the press is "too reactionary. It's too easy for the business press to look at what the analysts are saying." Most Wall Street analysts had a buy rating on Enron stock.

Indeed, only one group wanted Enron's stock to tank: the short-sellers, professional traders who bet on a stock's decline. One short-seller, Jim Chanos of Kynikos Associates, suggested to Fortune's McLean that she look at Enron's Form 10-K, a required annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

McLean says she understood Chanos's motive but was struck by the document. There were "strange transactions," "erratic cash flow" and huge debt. "It made you wonder, if their business was so phenomenally profitable, why they had to be adding debt at such a rapid rate," she says.

But the story was hard to write: "You can't just spout off about derivatives and mark-to-market accounts and expect people to get it."

Ironically, Fortune's own surveys had named Enron America's most innovative firm for six straight years, and much of the coverage was similarly upbeat. Last January, a Houston Chronicle story was headlined: "Houston has $100 billion company; Enron Corp. sets records for sales, earnings in 2000."

There were a few critical pieces, but they mainly focused on politics.

In February, the Los Angeles Times reported on the close ties between Lay and the president, noting that Bush had flown on Enron jets during the campaign. In March, The Washington Post ran a piece on Lay's growing influence. In May, the New York Times quoted the federal government's top electricity regulator, Curtis Hebert Jr., as saying Lay had offered to support his continued tenure if he changed his views on energy deregulation. Hebert says he declined. Bush replaced him months later.

In August, at a Fortune conference in Aspen, Lay told Rik Kirkland, Fortune's managing editor, that Enron really disliked McLean's story. A week later, Skilling quit as CEO after just six months on the job, calling it a "personal decision."

"The main point of failure was when Skilling resigned, because unless he had cancer or something it was inexplicable," Business Week's Shepard says. "The failure of the press was not saying, 'What's going on here?' " Business Week talked to Skilling off the record but could shed no further light on the situation.

To be sure, journalists were skeptical. "The abruptness of the departure left many analysts questioning whether a series of setbacks the company has suffered played a part in the decision," the New York Times said. Enron's stock, which had fallen by 50 percent since January, dropped another 14 percent in two days.

Some commentators unloaded on the company. "Until they clear this one up, Enron's a goner," former money manager Jim Cramer wrote on RealMoney.com.

But hard information was scarce. "It's almost as if you have to use forensic accountants when you're doing a company story because many companies are using very aggressive accounting techniques that are perfectly legal," Shepard says.

Enron fired Fastow in October for overseeing questionable off-the-books partnerships, and in November the company admitted overstating its profits by $600 million. But most papers played these stories on their business pages.

Even Enron's Dec. 2 declaration of bankruptcy failed to make the front pages of USA Today, The Washington Post, the Boston Globe and the Philadelphia Inquirer. The CBS, NBC and ABC evening newscasts each gave the announcement two sentences. The media were still heavily focused on the war in Afghanistan.

Now that Enron's stock has been booted off the New York Stock Exchange, Fortune staffers can't say enough about the way McLean defied both Enron executives and conventional wisdom.

"It was a gutsy thing to do," Kirkland says. "We trusted her. When you look back it's obvious: Why weren't we all asking these questions?"

© 2002 The Washington Post Company