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


To: stockman_scott who wrote (3055)7/9/2004 9:07:11 AM
From: Glenn Petersen  Respond to of 3602
 
2 Guilty in Fraud at a Cable Giant

July 9, 2004

THE OVERVIEW

By BARRY MEIER

John J. Rigas, the son of Greek immigrants who took a $300 investment and grew it over five decades into the nation's sixth-largest cable company, was convicted yesterday on charges of conspiring to loot hundreds of millions of dollars from Adelphia Communications, the company he built.

His son and heir apparent, Timothy J. Rigas, was also convicted of conspiracy and fraud by a federal jury in Manhattan.

After the verdicts were read, John Rigas, 79, a small man with a shock of white hair, sat slumped in his seat for more than 30 minutes.

Jurors said they had failed to reach a verdict on most of the charges against another of Mr. Rigas's sons, Michael J. Rigas, and they were ordered by the judge to continue deliberations today. A fourth defendant, Michael C. Mulcahey, Adelphia's former director of internal reporting, was acquitted on all counts.

The convictions are a substantial victory for the government and follow other recent successful prosecutions by federal prosecutors in Manhattan, including high-profile cases against Frank P. Quattrone, the technology investment banker, and Martha Stewart.

The Adelphia case was one of the most prominent in a wave of corporate scandals that followed the collapse of Enron in 2001. At its heart, the Adelphia case was about the apparent inability of the Rigases to draw a line between their personal interests and those of the company, which John Rigas founded in 1952 and operated as a private company until 1986. Residents of the town where Adelphia was based for years reacted with disbelief.

Indeed, it was those issues peculiar to a family-controlled business - from nepotism to the inability of a founder to give up control - that made the Adelphia case a distinctive one among big corporate scandals.

What also set Adelphia apart was the small-town world of the company and the Rigas family. Both Michael, 50, and Timothy, 47, are unmarried and live in the same house as their father and mother in Coudersport, the north central Pennsylvania town that was Adelphia's headquarters until it sought bankruptcy protection.

John Rigas and Timothy Rigas, who was Adelphia's former chief financial officer, were found guilty of one count of conspiracy, 15 counts of securities fraud and 2 counts of bank fraud. In essence, prosecutors charged that the Rigases had used $2.3 billion in Adelphia funds for their own purposes and had lied to investors and banks about the company's financial condition.

While they were acquitted on wire fraud charges, both men could face substantial prison terms. What sentences may ultimately be meted out may be affected by the recent Supreme Court decision on the federal sentencing guidelines.

A spokesman for the United States attorney's office in Manhattan said prosecutors would not comment yesterday because the jury was still deliberating.

Mark Mahoney, the lawyer for Mr. Mulcahey, said that he was pleased that his client had been acquitted. "It is of course wonderful for my client but it is bittersweet because of the convictions of the others," he said.

The jury's partial verdict was not a complete surprise, as the evidence presented against John Rigas and Timothy Rigas was far more compelling than that offered against Michael Rigas or Mr. Mulcahey. Prosecutors presented no evidence that Michael Rigas had lived lavishly.

The jurors sent a note to the judge, Leonard B. Sand, yesterday announcing that they were having difficulty reaching a verdict on certain counts. Judge Sand instructed jurors that while he would prefer a unanimous verdict on all counts, he would be willing to accept a partial verdict.

Jurors then delivered their verdicts.

Michael Rigas was acquitted of conspiracy and wire fraud charges. But jurors said they were still undecided on the securities fraud and bank fraud charges against him.

Judge Sand said he planned to give the jurors additional instructions today to try to break the deadlock.

The jury's eight days of deliberation followed a trial that was scheduled to last 12 weeks but dragged on for 18. There were many witnesses and about 1,000 exhibits. The 23 charges against the four defendants were so numerous and complex that it took the judge a day to instruct jurors about them.

The Rigases were charged with a number of crimes in effectively two areas of misconduct. One was that the Rigases had used Adelphia assets for their personal benefit, or treated the company, as prosecutors put it, like their own personal piggybank.

For instance, Timothy Rigas was accused of ferrying both the actress Peta Wilson and a golf pro, Lisa Lynn Scally, on the Adelphia jet and he also used Adelphia money to buy expensive condominiums and golf courses, according to trial testimony. Adelphia money was also used to finance a motion picture made by John Rigas's daughter.

The other area of crime involved the Rigases' misrepresentation of Adelphia's true financial condition, which was sinking fast in 2001 just as the Rigases were trying to expand the company and upgrade its cable system. To do that, former company executives testified that they and the Rigases inflated or made up a number of financial measures like cable growth and the company's earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or Ebitda.

At the time, Adelphia's Ebitda was increasingly falling behind both the company's own projections and the expectations of Wall Street analysts, who use the measure to compare the results of cable operators.

Adelphia "reported numbers that we basically made up," the government's main witness, James R. Brown, the former vice president for finance, said during his testimony.

Adelphia, whose cable systems are largely in the Midwest, as well as in Los Angeles and Florida, is working to emerge from bankruptcy or sell the company this summer. The company, now based outside Denver, is engaged in setting up an auction that is likely to draw interest from suitors like Time Warner and Cox Communications.

While counts of misusing corporate funds echoed those of other former chief executives accused of living high off the company, the Rigases were cut from a different cloth.

Executives like Samuel D. Waksal of ImClone and L. Dennis Kozlowski of Tyco hobnobbed with Manhattan power brokers, rock stars and fashion models, while the Rigases' sphere of influence extended only to Buffalo, where they owned the Buffalo Sabres hockey team. Instead, the center of their world was the tiny town of Coudersport, where John Rigas took the first step to build the nation's sixth-biggest provider when he purchased the local cable system in 1952 for $300.

Both he and Adelphia would stay in Coudersport for the next five decades, with Mr. Rigas acting as the town's main benefactor and Adelphia serving as one of the area's main employers.

The Rigases were also an unusually tight-knit family.

According to witnesses at the trial, Timothy J. Rigas tried unsuccessfully at various times to control his father's borrowings from Adelphia, which often reached $1 million a month. After being told by an associate that his father was misleading investors, he reportedly said, "I can't control my father."

For years, the Rigas family borrowed large amounts through Adelphia to buy either company stock or purchase cable systems that the Rigases held privately. The loans were obtained under so-called co-borrowing agreements, or bank loans that both Adelphia and businesses owned by the Rigases were jointly liable for repayment.

As a result of the Enron debacle, the Securities and Exchange Commission passed new regulations that required public companies to disclose the amount and type of off-balance sheet debt. The co-borrowing agreements fell into this category and it was the manner in which the Rigases treated the new S.E.C. regulations that led both to the end of their long reign at the cable company and their subsequent indictment.

Investors in Adelphia were long aware that these co-borrowing arrangements existed. But before 2002, they had never been informed about how much the Rigases owed - some of the trial's most vivid testimony involved the family's efforts to keep those numbers under wraps.


Much of that testimony came from Mr. Brown, the former vice president for finance at Adelphia. According to Mr. Brown, who pleaded guilty to fraud in 2002, he and Timothy Rigas concocted a variety of schemes to mislead the auditors, Deloitte & Touche, as well as banks and investors about the amount of money owned by the Rigases.

In the spring of 2002, however, the secret that the Rigases owed $2.3 billion to Adelphia could no longer be contained. Both John and Timothy Rigas tried to assure worried investors that they had the means to repay the funds but Adelphia stock quickly plummeted and the cable company filed for bankruptcy in June 2002.

Throughout the trial, lawyers for the Rigases argued that the family members had done nothing wrong and that they intended to repay Adelphia all the money they had borrowed.

Still, one lawyer jokingly referred to the family's borrowings from Adelphia as "the largest and longest-running bar tab in history."

Mr. Mulcahey was the only defendant to take the stand in his own behalf.

In his closing arguments, Mr. Mulcahey's lawyer, Mr. Mahoney, compared the government's pursuit of John Rigas to regicide, or the killing of a king, and described Timothy and Michael Rigas as fallen princes.

"When the time came for blaming, all the fingers were pointed at them and they were overthrown," Mr. Mahoney said. "It wasn't regicide. It was Rigas-cide."

After the verdicts were read yesterday, John Rigas's daughter, Ellen, leaned over to him when he finally left the courtroom and made his way past a group of reporters.

"Keep your head up," she whispered to him. "Keep your head up."



To: stockman_scott who wrote (3055)7/9/2004 9:16:36 AM
From: Glenn Petersen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3602
 
At the Helm and Ignorant of Company Troubles

July 9, 2004

NEWS ANALYSIS

By FLOYD NORRIS

nytimes.com

Ignorance is Kenneth L. Lay's defense.

The man who founded the Enron Corporation, even choosing its name, pleaded not guilty to fraud charges yesterday and insisted that he had not known of the fraud that brought the company down.

The Justice Department, which sought his indictment, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which filed a related civil suit, appear to accept a large part of Mr. Lay's defense. He is not charged with organizing the fraud, or even with knowing about it while it was flourishing in 1999 and 2000.

Instead, the government says he took part in covering up fraud and misleading investors in 2001, starting early in the year but with most of the actions coming in the months before the company collapsed in December of that year, as Mr. Lay - by his account - was trying to save it.


The only crimes that Mr. Lay is charged with before 2001 concern a failure to tell banks that money he was borrowing would go for the purchase of Enron shares.

In the civil suit filed simultaneously by the S.E.C., Mr. Lay is accused of violating insider-trading laws by selling stock when he knew of the fraud. But that suit makes clear that the S.E.C. does not think it has evidence that he knew of the fraud until early 2001.

The Justice Department filed criminal insider-trading charges against Jeffrey K. Skilling, who briefly succeeded Mr. Lay as Enron's chief executive, and against Richard A. Causey, the former chief accounting officer, contending that they sold shares while knowing of the fraud. But it did not file such charges against Mr. Lay.

For the Justice Department, getting any indictment of Mr. Lay may have been the goal. From the beginning, he was the symbol of Enron, the man who was close to President Bush - who called him "Kenny Boy" - and had influence during the early days of the Bush administration.

At the peak of his fame, he wowed fellow chief executives at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. To many, it seemed outrageous that the man at the helm would walk away while underlings went to prison.

"We can go to the top," said Linda Chatman Thomsen, deputy director of the S.E.C.'s enforcement division, "and the fact that we do, I hope, deters others from engaging in illegal behavior. It is our sincere hope that others who might be tempted to dissemble to the investing public will be deterred."

Mr. Lay asserted his innocence yesterday and blamed Andrew S. Fastow, the former chief financial officer of Enron - who has pleaded guilty and agreed to testify for the prosecution - for all his problems. He said he wanted a trial as soon as possible.

Mr. Lay answered questions from reporters, a highly unusual thing for a defendant to do. He had only praise for President Bush, although he said he had been closer to Mr. Bush's father, the former president. He said his net worth, once hundreds of millions of dollars, was down to around $20 million, after setting aside reserves for legal fees and court settlements, and that his liquid assets were less than $1 million.

What may have gotten Mr. Lay to this point in the legal process was the disclosure that as he was trying to reassure Enron employees that the company would be saved, he was secretly selling his own shares. To accomplish that, he used what came to be known as the "Lay loophole" in federal securities laws.

This provided that stock transactions between an executive and the company itself did not have to be disclosed until the following year. What Mr. Lay did was to repeatedly borrow $4 million from the company and then satisfy the loan by tendering stock to the company. Then he borrowed more money and tendered more stock.

In the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Congress closed that loophole with a vengeance. First, it required that all insider transactions had to be disclosed within days. Then it barred corporations' loans to executives.

Mr. Lay's defense against that charge will be that he was not a willing seller.

He had borrowed heavily against his stock, and needed the cash to meet margin calls as Enron's share price fell. Indeed, his transactions indicate that he believed the stock was cheap and that he was doing all he could to hold on until the price recovered - something that it never did.

Mr. Lay could have disclosed what was going on and explained that his sales were forced, showing how he was putting in all his available cash to minimize the number of shares sold. But it may be understandable that he thought such disclosures would only make the situation worse.

Since Enron went under, Mr. Lay has had to give up defending much of the image that he worked hard to create. He was seen as a brilliant executive - he has a Ph.D. in economics - who was both skilled at corporate infighting and had a visionary ability to see business trends before others did.

As the chief executive of Houston Natural Gas, he warded off one hostile acquirer in 1984 by paying greenmail - buying back the stock owned by the raider at an above-market price - but concluded that consolidation in the gas pipeline business was inevitable. In the spring of 1985, he agreed to have his company acquired by InterNorth, with the merged company to be based in InterNorth's hometown, Omaha, and known as HNG/InterNorth.

Mr. Lay was not supposed to become the top executive until considerably later, but he moved up well before the schedule as other executives quit. He moved the company to Houston and announced that it would be renamed Enteron. It turned out that name was already established in medical circles - having to do with intestines - so the company name was shortened to Enron.

In the 1990's, even as energy businesses bored investors, Enron became a Wall Street darling. It did that by pioneering in energy trading and then expanding into trading access to broadband communications. By then, it was considered a leading "new economy" company.

In February 2001, Mr. Lay handed over the chief executive reins to Mr. Skilling, and settled into the role of nonexecutive chairman. But then, Mr. Skilling quit in August - it is still not clear just why - and the board that Mr. Lay had largely chosen rewarded him with a $10 million bonus for again becoming chief executive.

This money wound up going to the banks to pay margin calls - something Mr. Lay now cites as proof that he did not know the company was going under. But the government contends that he also misled investors in discussing Enron's financial prospects.

In late August 2001, before it was clear that the company was in serious danger, he brushed off a reporter's question about the partnerships that turned out to be at the heart of the fraud. "You're getting way over my head," he said.

That statement turns out to be the basis of Mr. Lay's defense - that the visionary corporate leader with the doctorate in economics simply did not understand what was happening at the company he created and ran.

It is a humiliating way to end a business career, but may also be his best hope of staying out of prison.