Are we talking about the employees?

Post #256,857 by xtensive 5/25/06 2:03:23 PM Reply	Are we talking about the employees? 'Cause as I understand it, while the execs were pushing the company stock as _the_ investment to hold, they were not only dumping there's in the background, but the "regular folk" were also locked out from selling their shares. Stuck holding the bag (o' shite), I believe is how it is described. thanks, mx. "I'm man enough to tell you that I can't put my finger on exactly what my philosophy is now, but I'm flexible." -- Malcolm X
Post #256,860 by drewk 5/25/06 2:11:12 PM Reply	Yes, they're the ones most likely to have lost everything But unless company execs held more than 50% of the stock, which I believe is unlikely, then most of the money made on the runup was not made by insiders. For every employee who lost money, there were probably lots of non-employee investors who made money. Investing your entire life savings into one stock is never a good idea. It sucks that so many people only learn this the hard way, if they learn it at all. If I wanted to be a heartless prick I would say that all those now-broke employees were stupid to put themselves in that position. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #256,865 by tuberculosis 5/25/06 2:56:05 PM Reply	I don't believe they put themselves in that position I seem to recall that their pension fund managers put them in that position, investing very high percentages of the pension funds in enron stock. So they're the victims here. [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #256,869 by drewk 5/25/06 3:33:16 PM Reply	Curious So why does everyone keep saying Lay was encouraging employees to put their money into Enron stock? If they didn't have a choice, why was he doing that? === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #256,872 by Another Scott 5/25/06 3:48:51 PM Reply	Contemporary article about Enron's 401k. [link\|http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/3002308/c_2984379/?f=archives\|CFO.com]: The suit alleges that Enron "locked down" 401(k) accounts on October 17, preventing employees from changing the investments they held in their accounts until November 19. During that period Enron reported its first quarterly loss in four years and took a $1.2 billion charge relating to off-balance-sheet deals that are now being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Enron's stock plunged from $30.72 at the close of trading October 16 to $11.69 on November 19. Enron spokeswoman Karen Denne said that employees' access to their accounts was blocked from October 26 to November 19 due to a previously planned change in the administration of the retirement plan, according to published accounts. Lacey, 45, who has worked for Portland General Electric for 21 years, told wire services that the freeze on retirement account actions came while bad news about Enron was seemingly being released daily. "We couldn't take our money out of Enron stock into another portfolio. Basically they had us locked down to where we had no say over our own future," he told wire services. Before Enron's share price took a nosedive, Rinard had $472,000 in his 401(k) plan. He says his plan is currently worth just $40,000. Enron matches employees' 401(k) contributions with company stock. Many Enron employees, including Rinard, put their entire retirement account into Enron stock when Enron executives predicted that the stock would rise above $100 a share, Rinard told the Houston Chronicle. The lawsuit is reportedly being patterned after a case brought by employees against Lucent Technologies last summer concerning matching 401(k) contributions with company stock. As with Enron, the share price of Lucent has also dropped dramatically over the past year. Yes, it's dangerous to have all (or even most) of your retirement locked up in your company stock no matter how well it is performing at the moment. If the company tanks, you'll be out of your job and lose your retirement savings. Enron (and apparently Lucent, according to the story) did more than just encourage employees to buy their stock - they prevented them from getting out in an attempt to prop up the stock. If that wasn't a scheduled, routine blank-out period, then the managers should be charged with stock manipulation (or something). I don't think Enron's shareholders should be "made whole" (even if that were possible, which it isn't). I do think that fraud, deceptive practices, etc., should be punished and the people responsible should be liable for reasonable and fair civil penalties (not that any Enron shareholder class would collect much of anything if they're successful). FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
Post #256,874 by drewk 5/25/06 4:00:43 PM Reply	I hadn't heard about the lockout I guess the timing was that they were encouraged to get in, then once they had, they weren't able to get out. I'd love to see a memo come out that shows the execs talking about the lockout before they made the encouraging statements. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]

Welcome to IWETHEY!