Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Follies who wrote (151014)	2/13/2002 11:01:27 AM
From: oldirtybastard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

yeah, but the sheeple want to be protected from themselves while pretending that they don't except for those times when a handout can be smelt. And truly, if you were in charge, would you trust these stupid f*cking clowns to even wipe their own asses?

To: Follies who wrote (151014)	2/13/2002 11:03:40 AM
From: rolatzi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

We should make the Enron employees whole! In order to calculate how much they should be reimbursed for their losses, we need to calculate the fair price of Enron before it declared bankruptcy. The rise in the price in its go go days was almost entirely due the funny accounting so I expect that the fair price was much lower than the actual price attained. In addition, if the employees had the opportunity to sell their holdings over time, they should not be reimbursed for lack of diversification. They probably shouldn't have kept more than 10-25% of their 401K's in a single stock. They should therefore have been selling off their shares at each opportunity. Finally, if Enron had to contribute cash as their share of the 401K, what would their contribution have been? While, I understand that employees were encouraged to keep their Enron stock, I think there was only a short period when they could not sell. Could someone calculate how much the average Enron employee would get back under these assumptions. Ro