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.
Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)1/30/2002 2:19:49 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
Stocks Cut Losses, Pressured Ahead of Fed

Wednesday January 30 1:58 PM ET

By Denise Duclaux

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Stocks cut losses but remained under pressure on Wednesday as questions about the reliability of Corporate America's financial statements dogged investors ahead of an interest-rate decision by the Federal Reserve (news - web sites).

Traders, rocked by the scandal surrounding collapsed energy trader Enron Corp. (ENRNQ.PK), were unable to shake doubts about companies' accounting practices that helped drive the market to near three-month lows on Tuesday. Anadarko Petroleum Inc. (NYSE:APC - news) helped feed the market's worries after the oil and gas producer said it would restate earnings.

The jitters overshadowed a brief boost to the market from U.S. gross domestic product data, which showed the economy grew in the final quarter of last year. Investors are looking to the Federal Reserve's first interest-rate decision of the year, due at 2:15 p.m. (1915 GMT), for more clues on the economy. The central bank is widely expected to keep rates steady amid pockets of economic strength.

The market moved off its lows shortly before the Fed decision. The blue-chip Dow Jones industrial average (^DJI - news) edged up 12 points, or 0.13 percent, to 9,630, while the broader Standard & Poor's 500 Index (^SPX - news) shed 3.55 points, or 0.32 percent, to 1,097. The technology-laced Nasdaq Composite Index (^IXIC - news) was down 13 points, or 0.70 percent, at 1,879 after falling more than 2 percent near midday.

``Right now I am seeing cautious optimism, because it looks like an up period coming later on this year in the economy,'' said Arnie Owen, managing director of equities at Roth Capital Partners. ``The Fed has put in 11 rate cuts in the last year. There are a lot of positives in the market.''

Anadarko Petroleum Corp. (APC.N), the largest U.S. independent oil and gas producer, slumped $2.06 to $45.34. The company said it has restated third-quarter earnings to include a $1.7 billion non-cash charge because low oil and gas prices cut the value of some of its U.S. holdings.

Tyco International Ltd. (NYSE:TYC - news), slammed on Tuesday amid a swirl of questions about its accounting, also slumped sharply and fell as low as $27.50. The conglomerate, which has embarked on a dizzying array of acquisitions, fell another $1.65 at $32 and was the most active stock on the New York Stock Exchange (news - web sites).

Accounting worries hit shares of both energy trader and pipeline operator Williams Co. Inc. (NYSE:WMB - news) and travel services and residential real estate firm Cendant Corp. (NYSE:CD - news) for a second day in a row. Williams fell $2.63 to $16.15 before its stock was halted for news pending, while Cendant dropped $1.22 to $15.30.

Irish drugmaker Elan Corp. (NYSE:ELN - news) fell $8.58 to $25.50, a drop of 25 percent. Investors worried over its more than 50 research and development joint ventures and its practice of investing money in such operations and taking back a large chunk as licensing fees which are booked as revenues.

General Electric (NYSE:GE - news), the global powerhouse whose operations range from finance to aerospace, got caught up in the mix. The Dow member fell 99 cents to $35.47.

American International Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG - news) fell $2.85 to $69.99. The company stood by its use of special vehicles for financial deals, but the insurer's stock slipped as it was caught up in a swirl of fear about companies trying to push debts off their balance sheets.

WorldCom Inc. (Nasdaq:WCOM - news), caught on Tuesday in a web of rumors about a debt downgrade despite a denial from ratings agency Standard & Poor's, slid $1.15 to $9.25.

AOL Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:AOL - news) dropped $1.50 to $25.20. The media giant said its net loss widened due to a $1.7 billion write-down of some investments. Cash earnings fell short of the rosy predictions it issued after merging, as the online business matured and advertising slumped.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)1/30/2002 3:39:10 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
FOMC Statement...

Message 16984888



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)1/31/2002 10:43:26 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 65232
 
TROUBLED J.P. MORGAN CHASE IS POISED FOR A FALL

By JOHN CRUDELE
The New York Post

nypost.com

January 31, 2002 -- IS J.P. Morgan Chase too big to fail?
This question is admittedly a bit premature. But you can bet this concern will start going around in the next few weeks if the giant New York bank continues its recent streak of bad luck.

Back in early December this column speculated that Global Crossing Ltd. would be the next Enron, bitten by the bankruptcy bug. That happened this week as Global entered a pre-packaged bankruptcy with a couple of Far East firms.

In that December column I also speculated on the much more important aspect of Global Crossing's problems - that J.P. Morgan Chase, Citicorp and BankAmerica were each lead bankers for one part or another of Global's borrowings.

Global is said to have spent $15 billion in five years building a fiber-optic cable network around the world. Those banks largely got the money together, including putting in a lot of their own.

Even though other banks were lured in by Global Crossing's pitch, the focus will be on J.P Morgan Chase mainly because the company has been bathing in misfortune lately - having been heavily involved in Kmart and Enron as well.

The Chase part of the organization, meanwhile, made heavy and risky bets in the dot.con bubble a couple years ago. And we all know how that turned out. Those losses were one of the reasons Chase ended up in a merger with J.P. Morgan.

And if corporate failures weren't enough, J.P. Morgan Chase also was heavily involved in the banking situation in Argentina. Could all of this lead to a big problem? Yes.

Could all of this lead to - just perhaps - the failure of J.P. Morgan? Probably not, but only because the giant banking conglomerate is too big for Washington to allow it to fail.

PNC Bank this week shocked Wall Street by increasing its losses, mainly because of deficits that lay hidden off its main books. PNC, unlike J.P. Morgan Chase, isn't that important to the U.S. financial system. But the fears are similar.

Charles Peabody, one of Wall Street's best banking analysts, agrees that J.P. Morgan Chase will be preserved by the government, if it ever comes to that. "But that doesn't mean it won't be a $10 stock."

J.P. Morgan's shares were selling at $33 yesterday. But that's down from over $40 in December. The stock had been this low before: during the terror scare in September. Although it still recommends the stock, Merrill Lynch this week reduced J.P. Morgan Chase's forecast because it felt expenses would be higher than expected.

But what has the pessimists worried, very worried, is that some banks - think PNC - haven't been forthright in their financial reporting. Part of this is just a general concern about bank accounting, but it also has something specific to do with J.P. Morgan Chase itself.

Yesterday, for instance, J.P. Morgan Chase told Argentine authorities that a bank it co-owns down there may have broken the law by illegally moving $260 million overseas as that country's troubles increased.

Peabody, who works at a investment boutique called Ventura Capital, recently laid it all out for his clients.

"I remain convinced that J.P. Morgan Chase will emerge as the poster child for what ails this economy - excessive leverage, financial engineering, aggressive accounting and conflicted interests."

Uggh!

*

Can the new guy at Enron Corp. clean things up?

One of his friends is worried that Stephen Cooper, who took over the company this week, will be too busy and too distracted just running the company and its hundreds of subsidiaries, to actually clean up the mess.

Bill Brandt of Development Specialist Inc., a bankruptcy firm, says someone other than Cooper "is going to have to come in and look at the 800 entities. And many people don't want them looked into."

"I don't know how an employee of Enron is going to ask questions," says Brandt. He thinks the bankruptcy court should appoint a trustee - "the equivalent of a special prosecutor" - to take control of the off-balance sheet businesses.

* Please send e-mail to:

jcrudele@nypost.com



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)2/4/2002 12:43:02 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
Study: Investments Up in 4th Quarter

Saturday February 2 6:41 PM ET
By MICHAEL LIEDTKE, AP Business Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Venture capitalists emerged from the dot-com debris to finance more fresh ideas late last year, helping to lift quarterly investments in startups for the first time since the Internet bubble burst, according to a study to be released Monday.

Startups across the country received $7.1 billion in venture capital during the fourth quarter, a 2 percent improvement from the third quarter, based on statistics collected for the National Venture Capital Association by PricewaterhouseCoopers and Venture Economics.

It marked the first time venture capital volume climbed from the previous quarter since the industry showered entrepreneurs with $26.3 billion during the three months that ended June 2000.

Around the same time, the stock market began to shun unprofitable dot-coms that venture capitalists had nurtured in previous years, triggering a painful shakeout. The fourth-quarter bounce may signal the early stages of a turnaround, according to venture capital experts.

``We have bottomed out and are clearly on the road to recovery,'' said John Taylor, vice president of research for the National Venture Capital Association, the industry's main trade group.

Despite the fourth-quarter uptick, venture capital investment continued its drastic decline on a year-to-year basis. The fourth-quarter activity represented a 67 percent drop from the $20.9 billion invested during the same period in 2000.

For all of 2001, venture capitalists invested $36.5 billion, a 63 percent decline from a $99.6 billion spree in 2000. The 2000 figure lowers the National Venture Capital Association's previous estimate of $104 billion for that year.

The revision resulted from the trade group's decision to use joint data compiled by PricewaterhouseCoopers and Venture Economics, which previously released competing surveys.

Many venture capitalists said they believe they can build on the modest momentum of last year's final quarter.

``I wouldn't say we are much above the bottom, but at least it doesn't feel like we are going back down again,'' said Gregory Sands, general partner of Sutter Hill Ventures in Palo Alto.

As they re-enter the fray, venture capitalists are focusing more on biotechnology. The $1 billion that venture capitalists invested in biotech startups during the final three months of 2001 represented a quarterly record for the sector.

Biotech accounted for 14 percent of all venture capital investments in the fourth quarter. In contrast, the $867.6 million invested in biotech during the fourth quarter of 2000 accounted for 4 percent of the total volume.

Plenty of venture capital remains to be invested. Venture capitalists started the year with about $50 billion at their disposal, estimated Jesse Reyes, a vice president for Venture Economics.

The surplus is one reason venture capitalists aren't raising as much money as they were a few years ago. Rattled by heavy losses in the high technology industry last year, institutional investors also are trimming their venture capital portfolios.

With those forces at work, venture capitalists in the fourth quarter raised $9 billion for future investments, a 65 percent decline from the prior year, according to VentureOne, another industry research firm. For all of 2001, venture capital fund-raising totaled $48.2 billion, down 47 percent from the prior year, VentureOne said.

While the worst may be over for the industry, more pain could lie ahead. Many major firms still haven't recognized the drastic declines of their investments made during 1999 and 2000.

-

On The Net:

ventureeconomics.com

PricewaterhouseCoopers' venture capital site: pwcmoneytree.com

National Venture Capital Association: nvca.org



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)2/4/2002 4:02:51 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
Fuel Cell Technology Update - February 2002

Message 17003654



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)2/4/2002 5:15:59 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
Budget Gives SEC Only Slight Boost Despite Calls for Better Enforcement

By GREG IP
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
February 4, 2002

WASHINGTON -- Despite widespread demands for increased scrutiny of corporate accounting following Enron Corp.'s collapse, the White House is expected to recommend only a slight increase in funding for the lead regulator on such matters when its budget is unveiled Monday.

What's more, the Securities and Exchange Commission's operating budget wouldn't include money to back up a recent commitment from both Congress and the Bush administration to raise SEC salaries to stem an exodus of experienced staff, people familiar with the matter said.

Just three weeks ago, the agency appeared to score an important victory when President Bush signed legislation that would raise SEC staff pay to the levels of their counterparts at federal banking-regulation agencies, who earn an estimated 24% to 39% more. Funding the increase was to be handled later.

But just a week after the bill was signed, Chairman Harvey Pitt told staff in an e-mail, "Unfortunately, the Office of Management and Budget has advised us that funding for pay parity will not be included in the president's proposed budget for fiscal year 2003, which starts in October. While I am enormously disappointed by this, we are part of one government, and must abide by government-wide budget decisions."

The SEC originally requested more than $500 million for 2003, including $76 million to implement pay parity for its lawyers and investigators, according to people familiar with the request. As it is, the White House is expected to recommend a rise of about 4% from the agency's overall budget of $438 million this year, with the increase allotted mostly to additional technology rather than beefed-up salaries, these people said. In his e-mail, Mr. Pitt said the administration has agreed to let the SEC use some of this year's budget to partially implement pay parity in the current year.

The SEC experienced a major exodus of experienced staff in recent years, as the bull market drove up the salaries they could earn in the private sector. During one two-year period in the late 1990s, the SEC's New York regional office lost more than half of its 137-member enforcement staff. Critics say that hampered both the level of scrutiny the agency could bring to the markets and its ability to pursue cases.

For example, the SEC tries to review annual reports from large companies at least once every three years, but in the late 1990s its staff was so inundated with reviewing initial public offerings they were unable to scrutinize the usual number of annual reports. Last month, The Wall Street Journal reported that Enron Corp.'s 2000 annual report was scheduled for SEC review, but staffers delayed the process for another year, not only to await newly required derivatives disclosures but also, a person with knowledge of the process said, because they didn't want to take the time to wrestle with Enron's complicated filings.

The SEC could face fresh demands on its resources, as better policing of corporate reports and accountants is sought in the aftermath of Enron's collapse. SEC spokeswoman Christi Harlan said Mr. Pitt "has said that we have the staff and the resources to do the job we need to investigate Enron. What we will be interested in seeing is what additional duties Congress might ask the SEC to take on."

White House budget director Mitchell Daniels Jr. said in an interview Friday that the administration doesn't consider the SEC's request for pay parity "justified." He added, "I think the SEC is amply provided for. ... If they need more money, it might be for more investigations, as opposed to doing the same investigations and pay everybody more."

Write to Greg Ip at greg.ip@wsj.com
_________________________________________

HELLO.....When's the Government going to wake up and give our enforcement agencies the appropriate budget and resources they need to investigate and SERIOUSLY HUNT DOWN AND GO AFTER WHITE COLLAR CRIMINALS...??? Even hard-line conservatives like Kudlow are calling for The SEC budget to be DRAMATICALLY INCREASED....I hope Congress overhauls this proposed budget in a big way. We may need to cut out one of our inefficient weapon systems and use the funds to help The SEC go after some of the folks that are terrorizing our economic system right now.....----> lets go get 'the Ken Lays of this world' before they continue to ruin more companies and more innocent worker's lives....Folks are mad out there...In the health club sauna yesterday Enron came up in discussions MUCH MORE than The Super Bowl or The War on Terrorism...Americans are worried about 'future Enrons' and THEY WANT TO SEE THE GOVERNMENT TAKE ACTION...It will send the wrong message if 'The Ken Lay's of this world' continue to get away with things like O.J did....Most Americans want him to pay a price for what he's done...I'm not going to judge him right now BUT I do feel The SEC and our Justice Dept. need adequate funding and talent to really follow through for the country. The integrity of our economic system is at stake here. We need a new 'Special Forces Team' to go after high profile corruption and white collar criminals. Lets take this problem seriously..!!



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)2/4/2002 10:58:55 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
Enron's Lay Faces House Subpoena; Powers to Testify Today

By Jeff St.Onge and Susan Decker

Washington, Feb. 4 (Bloomberg) -- A House subcommittee chairman says he will subpoena Former Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay to force him to testify tomorrow, after Lay refused to appear before Congress voluntarily.

Lay canceled scheduled testimony today and tomorrow, a move his lawyer blamed on lawmakers' ``inflammatory'' comments about an internal company investigation.

The 203-page review concluded Enron executives enriched themselves while hiding at least $1 billion in losses in 3,000 partnerships, steps that led to the biggest bankruptcy filing in U.S. history. The study, commissioned by the board, was led by University of Texas Law School Dean William Powers.

Powers is scheduled to testify before the House Financial Services subcommittee this afternoon, along with Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Harvey Pitt.

Lay had been scheduled to testify before the same panel tomorrow and before the Senate Commerce Committee today. Representative Richard Baker, a Louisiana Republican who chairs the House Financial Services Capital Markets Subcommittee, will subpoena Lay to make him testify tomorrow, Baker's spokesman Michael DiResto said.

Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan, who was in charge of the Senate hearing, told NBC yesterday that the Powers report shows ``a culture of corporate corruption.'' Republican Senator Peter Fizgerald, a panel member, said the report depicts ``a giant pyramid scheme.'' House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Billy Tauzin spoke of ``security fraud'' on NBC's ``Today'' show.

``These inflammatory statements show that judgments have been reached and the tenor of the hearing will be prosecutorial,'' Lay's attorney, Earl J. Silbert, said in a letter to the Senate Commerce Committee.

Andersen's Response

The report said the board's audit committee shared in the blame for inadequate disclosures in Enron's public filings, along with management, Arthur Andersen LLP and the company's longtime Houston law firm, Vinson & Elkins.

Enron lawyer Robert Bennett said the report showed a resolve to find the facts and proved that ``the board was not provided a great deal of information that it should have had.''

Andersen spokesman Patrick Dorton called the report ``self- serving'' in downplaying the board's responsibility. ``The authors, whose independence is already in question, were handpicked by Enron's board,'' Dorton said. ``The authors failed to consult with Andersen in any substantial way.''

`As Little as Possible'

The report said investigators were told ``by more than one person that the company spent considerable time and effort working to say as little as possible'' in documents about transactions with related parties that proved to be Enron's downfall.

``That impulse to avoid public exposure, coupled with the significance of the transactions for Enron's income statements and balance sheets, should have raised red flags for senior management, as well as for Enron's outside auditors and lawyers. Unfortunately, it apparently did not.''

U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill said he wants tougher penalties on senior executives who mislead investors, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing an interview.

Lay, a contributor to President George W. Bush, ``bears significant responsibility'' for ``flawed decisions'' in approving some transactions, the report said.

Top Executives Profited

Enron employees involved with affiliated partnerships enriched themselves ``by tens of millions of dollars they should never have received,'' the report said. Former Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow made at least $30 million, former General Manager Michael Kopper got at least $10 million and two other employees made at least $1 million each, the report said.

``This personal enrichment of Enron employees, however, was merely one aspect of a deeper and more serious problem,'' the report said. ``These partnerships -- (called) Chewco, LJM1 and LJM2 -- were used by Enron management to enter into transactions that it could not, or would not, do with unrelated commercial entities.''

Transactions used to hide debts and offset losses didn't follow accounting rules and were implemented ``improperly,'' the report said. The transactions resulted in Enron overstating earnings from the third quarter of 2000 through the third quarter of 2001 by about $1 billion, the report said.

Favorable Results

``Many of the most significant transactions apparently were designed to accomplish favorable financial statement results, not to achieve bona fide economic objectives or to transfer risk,'' the report said. ``They allowed Enron to conceal from the market very large losses resulting from Enron's merchant investments by creating an appearance that these investments were hedged.''

Enron lawyer Bennett said the report shows the board wasn't shown details of the partnerships. Tauzin, a Louisiana Republican, blamed the board.

Tauzin said the report raises questions about Skilling, whose signature, the report says, was missing on some deals. ``What does that say about his knowledge about whether these deals were dishonest or corrupt?'' Tauzin said. Skilling will testify before the House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee on Thursday, Tauzin said. Fastow and Kopper will appear but will plead the Fifth Amendment.

In August 2001, Enron Vice President Sherron Watkins sent an anonymous letter to Lay raising questions about the partnership. Lay told the report's authors ``he viewed the letter as thoughtfully written and alarming.''

Enron, once the seventh-largest U.S. corporation, began to unravel in October after it said shareholder equity was reduced by around $1 billion because it used stock to pay off debt of a partnership run by Fastow. The writedown also raised questions about how Enron accounted for debt and losses of similar affiliated partnerships. On Nov. 8, it restated earnings back to 1997, lowering them by $586 million.

The company filed for bankruptcy Dec. 2 as its stock slid below $1 from more than $80 a year ago and the company was unable to finance its business.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (47258)2/4/2002 1:09:37 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 65232
 
<<<The New Risk Factor: Credibility

04-Feb-02 10:24 ET

[BRIEFING.COM - Robert V. Green] If you suddenly heard that half of all $20 bills were counterfeit, you would likely stop taking $20 bills as change. The collapse of faith would hurt the value of genuine $20 bills. A confidence problem is the single greatest threat to the market at this time. Whether it becomes a full fledged crisis or not, faith in company reports now needs to be listed as one more risk to equities.

The Elements of Doubt
There has always been a list of "standard risks" for equities. These include:

Economic risk: the country or world heads into a recession, hurting the performance of your company's business.
Sector risk: The economic sector in which your company contracts, hurting business.
Industry risk: The industry within the sector contracts, hurting business.
Company risk: Your own company fails to execute, and therefore becomes worth less
Market risk: The market simply refuses to pay up for performance in your company, for whatever reason.
Now, as a result of recent events, it seems wise to add one more risk to this list:

Credibility risk: the faith the market puts in management and reported numbers lessens, hurting the valuation multiple placed upon earnings and revenue.
This new risk is going to be the natural consequence of all of the following:

The Enron (ENE) scandal, which emphasizes distrust of management and corporate structure.
Revenue recognition issues: Global Crossing's 20-year contract accounting is only the most visible example.
The fall of sell-side analysts, whose analysis of business possibilities is now mistrusted.
It all boils down to one thing: Is information on which investment decisions are based, trust worthy?

Unfortunately, we now have an environment which is likely to cast doubts on all companies, not just "crooked" ones. The credibility risk is going to have an impact on all stocks.

Discounts For Risk
It is natural to assume that the Enron scandal will not affect your own stock. But it will.

The rise of the credibility risk is not likely to be undone by sending some Enron management to jail or by shareholder lawsuits. Because the issues involved in Enron and Global Crossing extend to all companies, a risk of "bad-information" is possible in all companies.

The market discounts current value for all perceived risks.

You can now add a discount for credibility to the price of all stocks. Even a solid, revered company like General Electric (GE) has now come into focus as a potential confusing financial portrait. GE was one of the first stocks profiled as "confusing" by the Wall Street Journal soon after the Enron collapse.

What are the likely consequences of an increased discount for credibility risk? Here are a few possibilities:

Complexity of financial structure will be discounted, not valued, as it is now.
Greater than expected revenue growth will face higher scrutiny, and carry less value.
"Pops" on beating earnings expectations will probably lessen, as rushing into positions based on small pieces of information may not be immediately rewarded, as it has in the past.
Debt will get increasingly more focus, and companies with higher debt will be devalued.
In short, the market is likely to demand a discount for the possibility that investment information is not entirely credible. Anytime information is closer to complex than it is to simple, a discount will be demanded.

Likely Suspects
Investments on which this discount is likely to be demanded in the short term (which means the stock price is likely to decline in the absence of any underlying fundamental driver) are the following:

Companies with a high debt/equity ratio
Companies with labyrinthine financial structures
Companies whose revenue models are of a long-term nature
Is it any wonder that Tyco wants to break themselves into four separate companies? Doing so will avoid being painted as a complex financial structure that no one can understand, and therefore won't pay for. Tyco is only the most prominent example of this trend.

Possible Action
The loss of faith in the capital markets during the 1930's hurt the country deeply, and lead to the hallmark Acts that still govern the financial markets: The Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Investment Advisors Act of 1940. Congress is anxious to avoid any broad loss of faith in today's market. Although it is too early to know what concrete action will be taken, other than a public pillorying of Kenneth Lay, major new regulation could be forthcoming.

For example, it is entirely possible, we believe, that the role of the Financial Standards Accounting Board (FASB), is altered. The FASB is a private sector organization that establishes rules for proper accounting practices. The FASB is officially recognized by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as the entity to establish accounting rules. However, the legal authority to establish accounting rules belongs to the SEC, not the FASB.

If the FASB becomes viewed as "not strict enough" because of its private sector self-police role, it will not likely survive intact. If this were to happen, the discount demanded by the market during the transition period would increase. Who knows what a companies financial picture would look like if new revenue recognition rules and reporting requirements were put into place in a single year?

Treading Water
In summary, the credibility risk argument has two components.

We are entering a period where published financial information by all companies will come under increased scrutiny.
The market will demand a discount in valuation multiples until it is clear that the scrutiny period is over.
It will take some time to build in a "credibility discount" into stock prices. Such an adjustment is likely to take several months. During that time, it is likely that Congressional action to "get to the bottom of this" and debates over new accounting principles will intensify. A new set of regulations, from accounting principles to 401(k) transaction rules are likely. The only unlikely scenario is that nothing happens.

Much as a swimmer going against the current expends a lot of energy to stay in one place, the stock prices of the best companies are likely to tread water during this period, even as they grow their businesses. The Enron/Global Crossing events may not be picked on as the reason for a market-wide stagnation, but the forces they have unleashed will be omnipresent nonetheless.

Comments may be emailed to the author, Robert V. Green, at rvgreen@briefing.com >>>