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.

Non-Tech : The Enron Scandal - Unmoderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (2172)	6/16/2002 10:40:21 AM
From: Baldur Fjvlnisson	Respond to of 3602

Oh, my credibility is at stake? Yeah right sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I think you may want to look at what has been said and posted for the past YEARS. Hang the mob garbage and Officer Friendly.

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (2172)	6/16/2002 2:19:39 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 3602

Hi Glenn, Re: The SEC proposal is not a bad idea, although the upper management of public companies are already signing representation letters as part of the audit process. This will add another layer of accountability and penalties. I tend to agree more with Baldur on the SEC. I see Harvey "the snake" Pitt as using this announcement of new "representation letters" as a ruse, and a red herring to get the public to believe some reform is being enforced, when in reality, nothing at all is changing, except that the process of disclosure becomes even more opaque. Pitt is an enemy of the public investor, his protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. -Ray