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.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (239725)3/19/2002 1:45:44 AM
From: ManyMoose  Respond to of 769670
 
Sounds good to me!

First, I'd have us live within our means.



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (239725)3/19/2002 3:23:46 AM
From: Baldur Fjvlnisson  Respond to of 769670
 
IS anything straight in Crooked Valley?

IR-‘RATIONAL’ ACCOUNTING

By CHRISTOPHER BYRON
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



March 18, 2002 -- IS anything straight in Crooked Valley?
The question comes to mind in light of two documents that drifted in recently on the breeze. The first: An analysis of a twisted and hopelessly conflicted stock deal involving a company called Rational Software Corp. And secondly, the latest He-Man helping of bafflegab from the malarkey machine at Cisco Systems Inc.

Together these two documents offer as clear an insight as one could ask for, into the incestuous world of big business in Silicon Valley for more than a decade.

During the 1990s, the executives who ran the software and semiconductor companies that sprang up in and around Palo Alto, Calif., came to believe that their soaring stock prices had somehow unhinged them from the fuddy-duddy rules of the boring old bunch back east.

THIS was the new world of West Coast entrepreneurialism, with its own dynamics and rules, its own players and goals. In this world, executives bought each other's stock, invested in each other's companies, took in each other's wash and cut each other's hair - over and over again until Silicon Valley became a land of business hemophiliacs, where no one thought twice about carnal union with the corporate equivalent of one's own next of kin.

Consider in that regard the instructive report on Rational Software by an insightful young financial writer named Cody Willard.

We are indebted to Willard, who writes for the Street.com Web site, for alerting his readers to an outrageous - though almost totally uncriticized - stock ploy by the duo who run Silicon Valley-based Rational Software (which is a nearly $1-billion-a-year business, in case you're interested).

The two individuals in question - Rational's chairman, Paul Levy, and the company's chief executive officer, Michael Devlin - apparently figured that their base annual salaries of $1 million each weren't enough to get by on. So in late 1999, while tech fever was at 110 degrees and climbing, they created a company called Catapulse Co. and issued themselves roughly half its stock, then capitalized the business with $50 million from Rational Software.

Then, after about a year Paul and Mikey had Rational buy back Catapulse for $445.2 million in Rational stock, of which $200 million tumbled into the gaping pockets of our two heroes. And through it all, no one except Willard seems to have batted an eye.

THE name for this sort of financial- world shell game is a "spin-in," and no one plays ¦¦it with greater finesse than the crew at Cisco.

The last time we heard from Cisco, on the subject of its stupid accounting tricks, the Silicon Valley giant was all torqued out of shape because we had shown the temerity to suggest that the company's financial filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission didn't add up. In particular, we didn't like the ultra-chummy partnership deals the company had set up so that members of its own board of directors could profit in Cisco takeover deals. We documented plenty of these deals. They involved Cisco's chairman of the board, the vice chairman, the CEO and all sorts of top corporate underlings.

Now comes yet another stupid accounting trick: a Rational Software-style "spin-in" known as "Andiamo Systems Inc."

This deal is disclosed with peekaboo coyness in the company's latest quarterly financial report to the SEC, filed on March 11. A Cisco p.r. person was busy last week telling reporters that the disclosure was prompted by a new SEC guideline, but that is baloney.

The guideline in question, so-called FR-61, simply reminds companies of disclosure rules that have been in force for at least 15 years.

In the filing, Cisco reveals only that it has made investments in four unnamed, "privately held, development-stage companies" - one of which has been set up with a pledge of $84 million in start-up capital from Cisco, which pledge could grow to a total of $184 million if certain unspecified sales targets are achieved by the start-up. If everything happens just right, Cisco would then buy the company back for $2.5 billion in Cisco shares, no later than summer of 2004.

HERE is what was not disclosed in the filing, which Cisco's controller, one Dennis Powell, let slip in an interview the next day with The Wall Street Journal: that fully 25 percent of the start-up's 200 employees are in fact actually employees of Cisco itself, who have been granted "leave" to go work for the start-up.

What's more, incorporation papers that we've obtained from the office of the California secretary of state show that the start- up in question, Andiamo Systems, is in fact housed in an actual Cisco office building - on the third floor, to be precise.

There have been rumors within Cisco that the whole start-up fandango was in fact set up to placate Cisco's top engineering honcho, one Mario Mazzola, who has been described in the industry's trade press as the "mastermind" behind the Andiamo project.

Mazzola was said to have been on the verge of leaving the company for a juicy opportunity elsewhere in the summer of 2000, and was enticed to remain at Cisco through the spin-in stock deal.

BUT the rumors may well be baseless. A Cisco spokesman insists, quite emphatically, that Mazzola does not now have - and never had - any interests in Andiamo whatsoever. If that is the case, Mazzola himself would have stood to gain nothing from the spin-in, with the gravy going instead to others.

As recently as last spring, the Andiamo Web site listed an individual named "Tom Edsall" as the start-up's "co-founder and chief technology officer." A widely followed industry Web site, ByteandSwitch.com, said he, like other members of the Andiamo executive team, was reachable through the Cisco switchboard and used a Cisco e-mail address. But the Andiamo site now lists the names of no employees, executive-level or otherwise.

The mystery enveloping this Andiamo spin-in scheme is simply preposterous. If this had been a straight-ahead business arrangement, Cisco could have taken the $184 million it claims to have committed to the start-up and simply hired some new people and put them to work as actual Cisco employees, period.

Instead, the whole thing was set up like some kind of Defense Department skunk works in the apparent hope that no one would notice what was going on.

But the company seems to have known it should have fessed up all along and now it has done so - though once again by revealing the absolute minimum possible to claim it is telling the truth.

In fact, of course, it isn't. In Hebrew folk wisdom, a half-truth is said to be a whole lie.

And that's what we have here: A whole lie, wrapped in the skin of an incomplete half- truth. It is how business has been conducted in Crooked Valley for nearly 20 years. Are you surprised?

nypost.com



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (239725)3/19/2002 10:20:17 AM
From: Baldur Fjvlnisson  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
Facing down foreclosure: As unemployment spreads through region, more are struggling to keep their homes

By Elizabeth Rhodes
Seattle Times staff reporter

Fearing foreclosure? Take steps to avert it

Kathrine Dator called. The single mother of four tosses at night worrying about where they'll live if she can't make good on her $780-a-month mortgage.

Brian Gauger called. He's draining his kids' college funds to stay in his house.

Robyn Benjamin called. She signed the final paperwork purchasing her townhouse a week after Sept. 11, and then the bottom dropped out.

All three lost their jobs at Boeing — and they're all contributing to a staggering increase in requests for help by frantic homeowners frightened by the specter of having a foreclosure notice stapled to their front door.

Washington state has suffered seven consecutive quarters of increases in home-foreclosure rates, compared with three quarters nationwide, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association of America.

At the end of 2001, the percentage of homes being foreclosed in this state was up 40 percent over the previous year — and reached its highest level in 13 years.

Kristine Beaton takes those frantic calls from homeowners at the Housing Counseling Program of the nonprofit Fremont Public Association, which assists people living from King County north to the border with Canada. Her agency saw a fourfold increase in calls for help in the last four months of 2001, compared with the same period a year earlier.

"By November, we were going crazy, because there were people being laid off in droves," Beaton says.

The root of their problems had changed dramatically. In late 2000, the cause of mortgage problems was fairly evenly split between job loss and money-management problems or family breakup.

Now, 53 percent — more than twice the level of the same period a year earlier — were reporting their problems stemmed from either being out of work or losing hours.

Since Sept. 11, Boeing has announced more than 12,700 layoffs locally. Since the beginning of October, local firms have pink-slipped almost 18,000 more.

For homeowners, the worst is yet to come, Beaton predicts, as laid-off workers burn through their savings.

"With Boeing, we won't see (the full effect) until six or eight months later," she estimates.

"That's the scariest part."

It's particularly scary, Beaton says, because a foreclosure is worse than bankruptcy; it leaves a 10-year black mark on a homeowner's credit.

Area foreclosures shoot up

Washington state and the Puget Sound area have been fortunate in recent years, trailing many other areas of the nation in foreclosure rates.

At the end of last year, for example, 0.88 percent of all mortgages in this state were in foreclosure, compared with the national average of 1.04. In the Puget Sound area, the figure was even lower, slightly more than one-third of 1 percent.

But in both cases, the gap appears to be closing — and raising concerns about the widening impact of the region's rising jobless rate.

The percentage of homeowners forced out by foreclosure has grown 12 percent nationally in the past two years — and 80 percent in the Seattle-Tacoma area.

The rate of foreclosures is rising despite a strong buffer, particularly in the central Puget Sound area, where the continued strength of home sales allows the majority of those in trouble to sell before they lose their houses.

"If you bought a house under $300,000 within the last 18 months or more, you probably have enough equity to get yourself out of trouble by selling it," says Denny Bullock, Prudential MacPherson's vice president of sales.

Of course, someone who sells after missing one or more mortgage payments finds themselves not only without a home, but also saddled with blemished credit.

Doug Duncan, chief economist for the Mortgage Bankers Association, says Washington's foreclosure numbers are not yet a serious problem for the industry.

But, he acknowledges, "for the individuals involved, it is a serious problem."

Seeking solutions

Kathrine Dator knows her problems are serious. Since leaving Boeing, where she worked in production, the best job she has been able to find is a bakery's 3 a.m. shift. It pays less than half of what she formerly earned.

She began missing house payments just before Christmas. Though she says her four school-age kids didn't ask for presents because they knew times were desperate, she would have felt guilty about giving them nothing. And so she spent modestly, diverting money earmarked to pay the mortgage on her south Seattle house.

Now she's visibly stressed at the very real possibility her kids will lose the only home they've ever known. And then?

"If I lose it, I'll never get a reasonable mortgage payment again," she frets.

The first step: Dator and Beaton fill out what's called "loss mitigation paperwork": a thick packet of information Dator's lender wants to see before deciding whether to work with her or foreclose.

In her paperwork, Dator explains why she has missed payments and how she plans to make them up. That means meticulously documenting her income and expenditures, and squeezing every penny.

Beaton says there's no one-size-fits-all solution. "People come in here hoping something incredible will happen to solve the problem," but there's no quick fix.

Rather, the agency first stresses education, because "people pretty much don't understand their rights or the foreclosure process," which in this state takes 190 days from the first missed payment to forfeiture of the home.

The agency assesses each client's ability to bounce back. That involves looking at the loan, the lender, the person's assets and the services available to put them on the road to recovery.

Sometimes it means hooking them up with employment or child-care resources, or even sources that can help with utilities.

But sometimes those solutions are futile. Then, "our goal is to tell them they're not going to make it," Beaton says. "That's not fun."

Some delay seeking help because they're in denial about how dire their situation is. Others fear that letting their lender know of their plight will make things worse.

But trying to hide from the lender — out of fear, embarrassment or whatever — is the worst thing to do, stresses A. Linda Taylor, housing coordinator for the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle, King County's only other nonprofit mortgage-counseling service.

"A lot of lenders will work with you, but you have to be in contact with them," Taylor says. "That's the main thing. Call them."

Lenders offer options

Some lenders will agree to reduce or suspend regular mortgage payments temporarily. A three-month suspension is what their lender offered Everett's Brian and Cornelia Gauger after Brian showed his Boeing layoff was a result of the Sept. 11 attacks. He was a contract software engineer who's still unemployed.

Very proactive in dealing with his situation, Gauger, who's depleting his kids' college funds, says Beaton's agency was especially helpful when his lender's collections department, unaware of the suspended-payments agreement issued by a different department, began aggressively dunning him.

"It was pure Kafka, only with computers," Gauger says. "We needed people like the Fremont Public Association because there were people who said they were going to take my house away, and what was I going to do?" The dunning notes have stopped.

Another option for homeowners is to modify the mortgage, changing the interest rate or adding the missing payments onto the loan amount. A common option is simply to work out a plan to make up the missing payments.

Bill Garland, president of Fairbanks Capital, which administers loans for roughly 30 lenders throughout the U.S., says lenders would much rather work out a plan than seize someone's home.

"That's the last thing lenders want, because they're not real-estate investors," he says. "And in a foreclosed situation, we typically still incur some sort of loss, so that's not the preferable solution to us."

But while putting a recovery plan on paper sounds straightforward, often it's not. That's where the Fremont Public Association's counselors become advocates, working directly with lenders.

Some lenders, Beaton says bluntly, "are aggressive and hard to deal with. And people who get behind in loans get stuck in collections. It's not until you get someone who has the authority to look at other strategies that we can negotiate. Sometimes we have to push a little."

Sometimes they have to push the clients, too.

Homeowners capable of going on a financial diet often can be successful, but Beaton says they must be ruthless. They clip coupons and cut out restaurant meals, new clothes, cable TV, vacations. Some even sell their cars.

But others can't quite adjust. She recalls a couple who were within $150 a month — their regular recreational expenses — of making good their back payments. They refused to give up their fun and suffered the result.

Though Dator has no credit cards, Beaton says many homeowners in her position do, and they often carry hefty balances.

"The typical client experiencing reduced income doesn't have enough money to pay the big bill — the mortgage — so they pay the small ones," like credit cards. She says they shouldn't (nor should they continue charging).

Rather, they should set aside what they would pay toward their charge cards so that in a couple of months they'll have a full monthly payment for their mortgage lender. (Many lenders won't accept partial payments.)

Won't failing to pay their card charges tarnish the homeowner's credit? You bet, but Beaton argues it's a better choice than not paying the house note, which could remove the roof from over the homeowner's head. The same advice is given by the National Consumer Law Center.

And that's what Robyn Benjamin is doing: squeezing her budget dry. She closed on a two-bedroom condominium for herself and her autistic teenage son a week after Sept. 11. Two months later, she was laid off from Boeing.

"That threw me big-time," Benjamin says. "I was making $16.32 an hour, and in the real world outside of Boeing you don't come close to those wages."

Subsisting on unemployment while she weighs returning to school or work, Benjamin, like the others, has made paying her mortgage her priority.

Time will tell whether that will be enough.