How would lying about your loss reserves not be material to investors? Either you can cover your losses or you can’t. If you can you’re good and I’ll invest. If you can’t, I won’t invest.
Who got hurt here? It is immaterial to investors. Nobody was harmed. Nobody cares whether or not you would invest. The fact of the matter is that nobody was hurt financially. The stock was unaffected, therefore stockholders were unaffected.
Who was hurt here. Should people really go to jail? What taxpayers? How did the taxpayers suffer?
I do agree that it was dishonest, but a $500m transaction is not hatched by a couple of VP’s, this came from the top, and orders were carried out…Watch a few good men, good movie.
All this talk about “manipulating reserves” and “Either you can cover your losses or you can’t” is not quite germaine.
The alleged manipulation is about a $500 million transaction for a company with about $80 BILLION of reserves at the time. If you’re worried about a company’s reserves within 1% you’re cutting it awfully close.
Four of the five people convicted did not work for AIG. These people had no control over how AIG accounted for the transaction.
Not sure if anyone is familiar with the difference between SAP and GAAP? Why Sarbanes Oxley was passed? Come on – intentionally misstating liabilities by execs with a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders is a big crime, not just a violation of ethics and public trust. If you don’t think anyone should be punished for this type of crime you might consider the effects of letting this behavior go unchecked and read a book called “Anatomy of Greed” – it is about Enron.
I have been in this business for 43 years now and crime is crime. Just when did people start trying to justify it based on the companies ability to pay. There are lots of issues and when the price of the stock falls over something like this people are hurt. However the main issue here is greed and criminal activity. If an agent did anything simular then he or she would be run out of business, prosecuted, and jailed. How can you stretch so far as to try to justify CRIME by saying something like, “Well They Can Cover IT” so no harm no foul…That is BS…
Maurice Greenberg, the darling of IJ because he buys a lot of ads on IJ, and Warren Buffett, the last remaining unsullied icon who cannot at this late date be sullied because they will be no more role models left, knew about this and ordered its execution either directly or by clever indirection. The very high priced gophers executed it. They go to jail. M & W walk, without so much as a trial or appearnace in court.
Let’s wait to see the sentence. What these People did was wrong – and illegel. Our laws should be enforced. Jail time would be harsh in my view – given that their reputation and careers have been destroyed. However, with our wishywashy justices system, who knows what will happen. People who’ve done less have gotten harsh sentences, meanwhile – scum walk.
Wait a minute, I want to make sure I understand everyone here correctly. You actually believe that the purpose of the “legal system” is to deliver justice? That you give a group of individual men and women guns and the power to enforce a monopoly on a service (and that is after all what it is)and you expect “justice?”
No, the purpose of the “legal system” is to enrich a small group of people at the expense of a great many others. It’s strange that so many people believe that giving people a monopoly of violence over a given service area will ensure utopia. O.K., since that’s what you believe, let’s follow the same logic for shoes, food, etc.
I reliaze that at this time there is little or no justice in our court system, only law. I do believe though that until the sentences get real tough on the underlings they will continue to do the dirty work. When the sentences and punishment gets really tough and the sentences are long this type of thing will at least slow down because people at the top will not be willing to take the chance themselves. They will have no willing parties to do the work….Then the system can start to make a change hopefully for the better. Incidently I did consulting work for attorneys for about ten years until I learned better, so I understand how the system works.
To see why a monopolized legal system will never deliver justice, read the paper entitled “The Myth of the Rule of Law,” by John Hasnas, Professor of Law at Mason University. You can find it in two seconds through google.
I agree with lizard king
How would lying about your loss reserves not be material to investors? Either you can cover your losses or you can’t. If you can you’re good and I’ll invest. If you can’t, I won’t invest.
Good ruling on this one.
Who got hurt here? It is immaterial to investors. Nobody was harmed. Nobody cares whether or not you would invest. The fact of the matter is that nobody was hurt financially. The stock was unaffected, therefore stockholders were unaffected.
Not material? Manipulating the books to represent a false accounting to the public is dishonest. An you you count haven’t mentioned the taxpayers…
Who was hurt here. Should people really go to jail? What taxpayers? How did the taxpayers suffer?
I do agree that it was dishonest, but a $500m transaction is not hatched by a couple of VP’s, this came from the top, and orders were carried out…Watch a few good men, good movie.
>>Either you can cover your losses or you can’t
Don’t think that is an issue for AIG…They have a few bucks. While it may be deteriorating rapidly, they most certainly can cover their loss.
All this talk about “manipulating reserves” and “Either you can cover your losses or you can’t” is not quite germaine.
The alleged manipulation is about a $500 million transaction for a company with about $80 BILLION of reserves at the time. If you’re worried about a company’s reserves within 1% you’re cutting it awfully close.
Four of the five people convicted did not work for AIG. These people had no control over how AIG accounted for the transaction.
Not sure if anyone is familiar with the difference between SAP and GAAP? Why Sarbanes Oxley was passed? Come on – intentionally misstating liabilities by execs with a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders is a big crime, not just a violation of ethics and public trust. If you don’t think anyone should be punished for this type of crime you might consider the effects of letting this behavior go unchecked and read a book called “Anatomy of Greed” – it is about Enron.
I have been in this business for 43 years now and crime is crime. Just when did people start trying to justify it based on the companies ability to pay. There are lots of issues and when the price of the stock falls over something like this people are hurt. However the main issue here is greed and criminal activity. If an agent did anything simular then he or she would be run out of business, prosecuted, and jailed. How can you stretch so far as to try to justify CRIME by saying something like, “Well They Can Cover IT” so no harm no foul…That is BS…
Maurice Greenberg, the darling of IJ because he buys a lot of ads on IJ, and Warren Buffett, the last remaining unsullied icon who cannot at this late date be sullied because they will be no more role models left, knew about this and ordered its execution either directly or by clever indirection. The very high priced gophers executed it. They go to jail. M & W walk, without so much as a trial or appearnace in court.
Nothing like equal justice under the law.
Oh-oh, too fast to type correctly.
Oh well, to paraphrase our leader, “Is our children spelling?” I guess not in this case.
Let’s wait to see the sentence. What these People did was wrong – and illegel. Our laws should be enforced. Jail time would be harsh in my view – given that their reputation and careers have been destroyed. However, with our wishywashy justices system, who knows what will happen. People who’ve done less have gotten harsh sentences, meanwhile – scum walk.
Wait a minute, I want to make sure I understand everyone here correctly. You actually believe that the purpose of the “legal system” is to deliver justice? That you give a group of individual men and women guns and the power to enforce a monopoly on a service (and that is after all what it is)and you expect “justice?”
No, the purpose of the “legal system” is to enrich a small group of people at the expense of a great many others. It’s strange that so many people believe that giving people a monopoly of violence over a given service area will ensure utopia. O.K., since that’s what you believe, let’s follow the same logic for shoes, food, etc.
I reliaze that at this time there is little or no justice in our court system, only law. I do believe though that until the sentences get real tough on the underlings they will continue to do the dirty work. When the sentences and punishment gets really tough and the sentences are long this type of thing will at least slow down because people at the top will not be willing to take the chance themselves. They will have no willing parties to do the work….Then the system can start to make a change hopefully for the better. Incidently I did consulting work for attorneys for about ten years until I learned better, so I understand how the system works.
To see why a monopolized legal system will never deliver justice, read the paper entitled “The Myth of the Rule of Law,” by John Hasnas, Professor of Law at Mason University. You can find it in two seconds through google.