Posted on 01/13/2002 4:30:35 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
Guest lineup posted yesterday by FReeper dickmc.
Moreover, he pointed out that the 401K was only locked for 10 trading days in October (employees had been notified about this change in February). During the lockout, ENRON fell about $3 to $4 per share.
Great report, Brooks did his homework on this one.
You'll never convince them of that; or the press either; they make too good an interview.
Except for MAYBE a period from October 15 to November 15 (the dates are in dispute) the employees could have MOVED their stock at ANY TIME between the high of $82 in January and $13 in the middle of October. Even after the accounts were unfrozen, they STILL could have gotten out at $9 a share.
I would LOVE to know how much they PAID for that stock.
Any Enron stock which the employee bought with his contribution or outside the plan could be sold at any time. The stock bought within the plan could not be sold for a period of about 2 weeks when they were changing administration of the plan, which was announced back in February of 2001. The changeover period was during the end of October, beginning of November.
Stock contributed by the Company which was in the form of a contribution match to the plan, could not be sold unless you were over 50. This is very common practice my many companies.
So, the only stock they couldn't sell was the stock given to them by the Company. Now, they could claim, since there appears to be malfeasance on the part of the execs, that they deserve the basis of that stock at the time of the 401(k) match. This would be no where near the high valuation of the stock. Any gains on that stock would be unrealized gains and I am afraid that's the way of the market. They agreed to the match and knew they couldn't sell until they were 50.
As for their investment options, they had 20 to choose from.
My guess here is that the employees chose to buy the stock within and also outside the 401(k). They rode it all the way up and then didn't sell as it came down, which BTW,was not nearly as precipitous as the media claims. The stock came down throughout 2001 much like nearly every other stock. The employees are screaming about not getting their unrealized gains because they chose not to sell. Funny thing about the market - it's great when it's up and not so great when it is down.
Other than the employer match, it seems the employees just lost valuation in their stock like everyone else in the market over the past few years.
Congress should stay out of this. They are bound to mess it up!
Someone should sue the press for all the misinformation spewed out in this "scandal."
LOL! God, these guys know no bounds.
Kristol and Keyes were roomates at Harvard.
I take it Kristol gets no bonus points from you for the above.
As far as Don Evans goes, while he's not a ball of energy, he did a good job of defending his unwillingness to take any actions, that would have helped out Enron. Such actions would have given an appearence of preferential treatment by the Bush administration towards Enron.
Also, I wonder how much money McCain got from Enron, since he was the head of Commerce until Jeffords jumped ship.
Last night on Capital Gang, Bob Novak told viewers that Brooks Jackson had a great report coming up on Blitzer's show. CNN will replay it often, but we need to spread the word.
So much of this hand wringing media coverage about the poor, pitiful ENRON employees is nothing more than the media echoing Henry Waxman. A combination of 1. Ignorance on their part. 2. Laziness 3. And a overwhelming desire to get the goods on President Bush, VP Cheney.
I'm with Bill Kristol on this...it's not a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. Media elite goons and whores don't need to conspire with one another..it's a congenital defect in their New York, Washington gene pool.
So where is my money?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.