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: Raymond Duray who wrote (2189)	6/17/2002 10:08:28 PM
From: opalapril	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3602

I'm not at all sure I understand power trading, but if it is true that California power was sold elsewhere at or below the cap, how is that "fraud" as you allege? I ask because I was not aware energy traders were barred from trading California power outside the state, or required to trade it only inside the state. Of course, any trades away from California would reduce the supply and drive prices up in theory, but if they were capped anyway how does that hurt California? Just wondering....

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (2189)	6/17/2002 11:13:50 PM
From: RCMac	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3602

>> WILLIAMS CONFESSES! Re: any actual proof of incendiary allegations..... << Huh? I asked you in post 2153 whether you had any proof of your incendiary allegations that it was just like Goldman-Sachs shorting the heck out of some of their wunderkind dot.con IPOs soon as they got the public to kite 'em to the moon. In "Reply" #2156 you ignored that challenge to your willingness, or maybe ability, to tell the truth, while addressing me as "my friend" like some jerk cold-caller trying to sell me a wireless investment. You then picked up the incendiary allegations phrase in another unrelated context in "Reply" #2158, and now you pick up the phrase in yet another unrelated context. Babble, babble. Scrambled eggs.