I have a terrific idea for a screenplay.

I'm absolutely confident that once I write it, a major studio will pay me at least one million dollars for it.

In fact, I'm so certain that they'll love it, they'll even agree to give me a percentage of the final film's gross profits.

Conservatively, I'm estimating that will net me another five million dollars.

So really, I'm now worth about six million.

There's a sweet house that I really want that's on the market for about 2.5 million.

Based on my current worth of six million, I'm sure my local bank will approve my mortgage application.

Unless of course, they just don't "get" my finances.

Welcome to Enron-land.

Frank, your blog is entitled "In the Pipeline, Coverage from the Enron Trial."

How does reporting anonymous gossip regarding Enron's "activities" have anything to do with the trial? I've enjoyed reading your blog during the trial, but passing along this type of prattle is is inconsistent with your serious effort to report on the trail.

When I was a financial consultant (for 17 yrs, thank you) I'd see, meet, and on the quarterly conference calls, hear executives prattle on about how great everything was at their company... You could tell when it was true because it was transparent and obvious that their statements and math all added up. Then there were executives who we could instantly tell were selling smoke... "Nobody understands our business" is their refrain. "its the banks fault" "The media doesn't understand" In fact, we didn't because it was unintelligable. Even complex business isn't hard to understand if you follow the details of its mathematics and economics. Its the "smoke and mirrors" businesses that are hard to understand because they are built upon, well, smoke and mirrors... You scratch your head asking "where's the beef?". You know, we listened to that junk and then would gleefully challenge them about the very issues they were trying to obfuscate every time...

Just because a guy has shiny shoes and a fat wallet doesn't make him worth listening to, admiring, pandering to, or anything else. The MSM should really look at their behavior in regards to the defference they give to executives and their statements. Thank god for the WSJ reporters who said "the Emporer has no clothes".. You think the wipe out was bad at Enron? Well, consider the crimes they perpetrated against californians, the effects on the nation's real economy - not just the markets - and imagine if it had gone on undetected...

To Ken Lay we say: "If there had been any HARD VALUE to Enron assets there would not have been a run at the market on your stock".

To Mr. Skilling we say "Shouldn't have perpetrated and then believed your own lies about the trading operations, fraudulent accounting... and next time remember these four letters "FASB" (Finnancial Accounting Standards Board)

Enron + energy traders = Corporate Crime Syndicate

Thanks for that last comment Long Beach, Ca. You hit the head on the nail.

If Enron's financials were so strong, Enron could have easily endured a downturn in the market by dipping into its cash reserves and/or by securing a loan against accounts receivables. Apparently, there were no substantial reserves and revenues were way down. So when Lay talks about how the underlying financials of the company were in good shape, compared to what? I don't know specifics, but if you compared the numbers from August '02 to '01 and '00, they're not going to look very healthy.

Hey, Matthew, I want 10 pct. of the gross (NOT profit...if you think Enron accounting sounded funny, good luck finding a Hollywood movie that makes a profit) and points on the back-end for inspiring the idea that led to your concept.

All of that is documented in Conspiracy of Fools.