â€Åâ€ŔAIG was mostly right†is absolutely WRONG!
It was disturbing to see Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger, both from Berkshire Hathaway, comment on AIG’s business practices. It was as if AIG were just a victim of a witch hunt, and not in serious violation of acceptable business practices.
Charlie Munger, Berkshire Hathaway’s vice chairman, said “Whatever comes along, people are going to find that a lot of what was done over the years was right at AIG.”
Aurthur Anderson was mostly right in all its audits other than Enron, but that didn’t prevent them from going bankrupt.
That’s like saying people mostly pays their taxes. Partial compliance, no matter what the reason, is unacceptable.
I am not generally a believer in government oversight. But Mr. Buffet’s comments have made it clear to me that our industry leaders still don’t get it.
“There was no outright fraud. They were essentially trying to manage earnings,” said James Gribbell, a portfolio manager at Babson Capital Management LLC, overseer of $90 billion, including 1.7 million AIG shares as of December. “The information is what the market needed to quantify the size of the problem.”
AIG found evidence that former senior managers ordered changes to its books, circumventing internal controls, and said entries were made to “enhance measures important to the financial community.”
We should have zero tolerance for integrity violations…period. We cannot condone the attitude that AIG cooked its books to meet investor demands. That is not acceptable.
I thought Enron taught us all a lesson that controllership is an absolute necessity. As that debacle fades into the past, it appears that some corporate leaders are forgetting the lessons that Enron taught us.
How can the media repeat these sort of junk opinions? What is the basis for his opinion? Where are the facts on which he is drawing his conclusions? Does that mean that 51% of their business practices were legitimate? If industry leaders are going to make statements that influence the market place, then they need to be held accountable, questioned for clarification, and chastised when they don’t have a clue about an ongoing investigation. Where is our accountability today? Was Charlie Munger paid to say that? Some Quid Pro Quo for not ratting out AIG? It is so far out of left field that one has to wonder what the motivation was? Corporate Arrogance regarding the little investors that can be led around by their noses? Or are they shocked that any corporation should be questioned about their accounting practices? Is there a corporate equivalent of a â€Åâ€Ŕblue wall†where CEO’s all have a code of silence or stick together?
For over 30 years Hank Greenberg has run AIG, and in only 2 months of investigation, $2.7 B in fraudulent activity has already been uncovered. And that’s before the real enchilada is even touched, reserve adequacy. I don’t think it is time to applaud AIG’s financial cunning until all the dust has settled. With over 30 companies with which to hide illicit practices, it will take months (or years) more time before AIG will get a clean bill of health.
AIG has violated the very principles of what it takes to run a business today:
Transparency
Integrity
Controllership.
Notes,
Would you give up your personal vendetta already? I’ve sat by and watched you slander Buffett over and over on every thread you can find concering him. You’ve went past envy directly into scorn. Maybe you don’t believe in his politics. Maybe you don’t believe in his choice of clothing, or the way he parts his hair, I don’t know, but give up the ghost.
And that comment on “a small insignificate person”, who are you? Bill Gates? If not, what do you consider yourself?
If Buffett, ranked by Forbe’s Magazine as World’s 2nd Richest Person, is insignificate, again, what are you?
â€Åâ€ŔAIG was mostly right†is absolutely WRONG!
It was disturbing to see Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger, both from Berkshire Hathaway, comment on AIG’s business practices. It was as if AIG were just a victim of a witch hunt, and not in serious violation of acceptable business practices.
Charlie Munger, Berkshire Hathaway’s vice chairman, said “Whatever comes along, people are going to find that a lot of what was done over the years was right at AIG.”
Aurthur Anderson was mostly right in all its audits other than Enron, but that didn’t prevent them from going bankrupt.
That’s like saying people mostly pays their taxes. Partial compliance, no matter what the reason, is unacceptable.
I am not generally a believer in government oversight. But Mr. Buffet’s comments have made it clear to me that our industry leaders still don’t get it.
“There was no outright fraud. They were essentially trying to manage earnings,” said James Gribbell, a portfolio manager at Babson Capital Management LLC, overseer of $90 billion, including 1.7 million AIG shares as of December. “The information is what the market needed to quantify the size of the problem.”
AIG found evidence that former senior managers ordered changes to its books, circumventing internal controls, and said entries were made to “enhance measures important to the financial community.”
We should have zero tolerance for integrity violations…period. We cannot condone the attitude that AIG cooked its books to meet investor demands. That is not acceptable.
I thought Enron taught us all a lesson that controllership is an absolute necessity. As that debacle fades into the past, it appears that some corporate leaders are forgetting the lessons that Enron taught us.
How can the media repeat these sort of junk opinions? What is the basis for his opinion? Where are the facts on which he is drawing his conclusions? Does that mean that 51% of their business practices were legitimate? If industry leaders are going to make statements that influence the market place, then they need to be held accountable, questioned for clarification, and chastised when they don’t have a clue about an ongoing investigation. Where is our accountability today? Was Charlie Munger paid to say that? Some Quid Pro Quo for not ratting out AIG? It is so far out of left field that one has to wonder what the motivation was? Corporate Arrogance regarding the little investors that can be led around by their noses? Or are they shocked that any corporation should be questioned about their accounting practices? Is there a corporate equivalent of a â€Åâ€Ŕblue wall†where CEO’s all have a code of silence or stick together?
For over 30 years Hank Greenberg has run AIG, and in only 2 months of investigation, $2.7 B in fraudulent activity has already been uncovered. And that’s before the real enchilada is even touched, reserve adequacy. I don’t think it is time to applaud AIG’s financial cunning until all the dust has settled. With over 30 companies with which to hide illicit practices, it will take months (or years) more time before AIG will get a clean bill of health.
AIG has violated the very principles of what it takes to run a business today:
Transparency
Integrity
Controllership.
“they could be doing anything with the accounting”….Mr Buffett was an excuse for everything. The more he speaks the deeper he sinks.
He dangles the word money in front of people yet some of us see right through Mr. Buffett for who he really is.
A small insignificate person who will pass on and years later people will say Buffett who?
Notes,
Would you give up your personal vendetta already? I’ve sat by and watched you slander Buffett over and over on every thread you can find concering him. You’ve went past envy directly into scorn. Maybe you don’t believe in his politics. Maybe you don’t believe in his choice of clothing, or the way he parts his hair, I don’t know, but give up the ghost.
And that comment on “a small insignificate person”, who are you? Bill Gates? If not, what do you consider yourself?
If Buffett, ranked by Forbe’s Magazine as World’s 2nd Richest Person, is insignificate, again, what are you?