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.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: H James Morris who wrote (975)	6/30/2002 10:38:29 PM
From: Jim Willie CB	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 89467

what if 25% of S&P is guilty of fraud in some form I suspect most firms are involved in serious chicanery and at least 25% (125 among S&P) are guilty of fraud how about investigating Microsoft and their liberal treatment of employee labor costs? I read a scathing expose in May about them that would rock Wall Street how about investigating MSFT and their criminal naked put selling? they talk down their stock late every quarter, sell naked option put contracts, mention difficulty in maintaining growth rates for revenues and earnings, then blow away the lowered earnings, only to result in total worthless expiration of the put contracts the practice caused great strain with major brokerage houses, and GoldmanSachs did almost a $1 billion quarterly business in this bullshit option selling scam Microsoft is guilty of theft in the product marketplace, monopolist antitrust violations in the competitive battlegrounds, fraud in the financial markets, and fraud in the accounting arena INVESTIGATE MICROSOFT, if no free passes!!! and how about Cisco's writeoff of $2 in product inventory? from what I understand, it was in NO WAY obsolete product instead, it was last year's new product and a clear method to pile on losses in 2001 to make 2002 look better and it worked according to plan perfectly "Cisco is turning it around on profits"... sure what crapp AOL was in violation in 2001 (or was it 2000?) they paid a fine, stopped the amortizing of promotion costs and now boasts they never pled guilty to any violations what crapp I want to see what off-balance sheet scum lurks on every multinational why is off-balance sheet even permitted? I would like to claim a $50k deduction on my IRS returns and post a line item that is off-balance sheet and not tell the IRS sonsabitches anything about it just "it is a partially owned subsidiary" the name of this offshore company is "BLOW ME, INC" yeah right, owned in part by me and all my tax evasion buddies I dont think 25% of the S&P could survive the harsh scrutiny of bright sunlight / jim