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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (68860)	5/25/2006 3:05:54 PM
From: hdl	Respond to of 361517

very interesting!

To: stockman_scott who wrote (68860)	5/25/2006 3:07:42 PM
From: SiouxPal	Respond to of 361517

I'd guess that "Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room" will be on HBO etc. soon.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (68860)	5/25/2006 3:09:35 PM
From: Travis_Bickle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361517

"In February 2000, Mother Jones has learned, the Lays paid about $4 million -- an amount greater than Lay's entire salary from Enron that year -- to buy variable annuities that will, starting in 2007, guarantee the couple an annual income of about $900,000." The annual income looks farfetched to me given the initial investment. But I did the same some time ago to provide me with "sh** hits the fan" money. In Florida we have a four year look-back period for such conveyances, and it is only exempt (near as the experts can tell, lots of unsettled law in this area) if there is a surrender charge. Some low-cost variable annuities don't have surrender charges. Also the investment should not leave you anywhere near to insolvent. I went with a Vanguard fixed-rate annuity with a surrender charge which is a piece of crap investment but it would pass court muster if push came to shove. Imo for someone of his (former) net worth it is not a surprising transaction, you'd have to be an idiot not to squirrel some money away in his position.