💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 3589.gmi captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)

➡️ Next capture (2023-01-29)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

The Biggest Stock Scams Of All Time

It is unfortunate, but words often associated with money and fortune are

"cheat," "steal," and "lie." Who among us hasn't "accidentally" taken two $500

bills from the Monopoly bank, or forgotten at least once to pay $5 back to a

friend? Chances are you were never called on it because your friends trusted

you. Just as we trust our friends, we put faith in the investing world.

Investing in a stock takes a lot of research, but it also requires us to make a

lot of assumptions. For example, we assume reported earnings and revenue

figures are correct, and that management is competent and honest. But these

assumptions can be disastrous.

Understanding how disasters happened in the past can help investors avoid them

in the future. With that in mind, we'll look at some of the all-time greatest

cases of companies betraying their investors. Some of these cases are truly

amazing; try to look at them from a shareholder's standpoint. Unfortunately,

these shareholders had no way of knowing what was really happening as they were

being tricked into investing.

ZZZZ Best Inc., 1986 - Barry Minkow, the owner of this business, posited that

this carpet cleaning company of the 1980s would become the "General Motors of

carpet cleaning". Minkow appeared to be building a multi-million dollar

corporation, but he did so through forgery and theft. He created more than

10,000 phony documents and sales receipts without anybody suspecting anything.

Although his business was a complete fraud designed to deceive auditors and

investors, Minkow shelled out more than $4 million to lease and renovate an

office building in San Diego. ZZZZ Best went public in December of 1986,

eventually reaching a market capitalization of more than $200 million.

Amazingly, Barry Minkow was only a teenager at the time! He was sentenced to 25

years in prison.

Centennial Technologies Inc., 1996 - In December 1996, Emanuel Pinez, the CEO

of Centennial Technologies, and his management recorded that the company made

$2 million in revenue from PC memory cards - the company was really shipping

fruit baskets to customers. But the employees then created fake documents to

appear as though they were recording sales. Centennial's stock rose 451% to

$55.50 per share on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). According to the

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), between April 1994 and December 1996,

Centennial overstated its earnings by about $40 million. Amazingly, the company

reported profits of $12 million when it really lost about $28 million! The

stock plunged to less than $3. Over 20,000 investors lost almost all of their

investment in a company that was once considered a Wall Street darling.

Bre-X Minerals, 1997 - This Canadian company was involved in one of the largest

stock swindles in history. Its Indonesian gold property, which was reported to

contain more than 200 million ounces, was said to be the richest gold mine

ever. The stock price for Bre-X skyrocketed to a high of $280 (split adjusted),

making millionaires out of ordinary people overnight. At its peak, Bre-X had a

market capitalization of US$4.4 billion. But the party ended on March 19, 1997,

when the gold mine proved to be fraudulent, and the stock tumbled to pennies

shortly after. The major losers were the Quebec public sector pension fund,

which lost $70 million; the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, which lost $100

million and the Ontario Municipal Employees' Retirement Board, which lost $45

million.

Enron, 2001 Prior to this debacle, Enron, a Houston-based energy trading

company was, based on revenue, the seventh largest company in the U.S. Through

some fairly complicated accounting practices that involved the use of shell

companies, Enron was able to keep hundreds of millions worth of debt off its

books. Doing so fooled investors and analysts into thinking this company was

more fundamentally stable than it actually was. Additionally, the shell

companies, run by Enron executives, recorded fictitious revenues, essentially

recording one dollar of revenue multiple times, thus creating the appearance of

incredible earnings figures. Eventually, the complex web of deceit unraveled,

and the share price dove from over $90 to less than $0.70. As Enron fell, it

took down with it Arthur Andersen, the fifth leading accounting firm in the

world at the time. Andersen, Enron's auditor, basically imploded after David

Duncan, Enron's chief auditor, ordered the shredding of thousands of documents.

The fiasco at Enron made the phrase "cook the books" a household term once

again.

WorldCom, 2002 - Not long after the collapse of Enron, the equities market was

rocked by another billion-dollar accounting scandal. Telecommunications giant

WorldCom came under intense scrutiny after yet another instance of some serious

"book cooking". WorldCom recorded operating expenses as investments.

Apparently, the company felt that office pens, pencils and paper were an

investment in the future of the company and therefore expensed (or capitalized)

the cost of these items over a number of years. In total $3.8 billion (yes,

with a 'b') worth of normal operating expenses - which should all be recorded

as expenses for the fiscal year in which they were incurred - were treated as

investments and were recorded over a number of years. This little accounting

trick grossly exaggerated profits for the year the expenses were incurred; in

2001, WorldCom reported profits of around $1.3 billion. In fact, its business

was becoming increasingly unprofitable. Who suffered the most in this deal? The

employees - tens of thousands of them lost their jobs. The next ones to feel

the betrayal were the investors who had to watch the gut-wrenching downfall of

WorldCom's stock price, as it plummeted from more than $60 to less than $0.20.

Tyco International (NYSE: TYC), 2002 - With WorldCom having already shaken

investor confidence, the executives at Tyco ensured that 2002 would be an

unforgettable year for stocks. Before the scandal, Tyco was considered a safe

blue chip investment, manufacturing electronic components, healthcare and

safety equipment. During his reign as CEO, Dennis Kozlowski, who was reported

as one of the top 25 corporate managers by BusinessWeek, siphoned hordes of

money from Tyco in the form of unapproved loans and fraudulent stock sales.

Along with CFO Mark Swartz and CLO Mark Belnick, Kozlowski received $170

million in low-to-no interest loans, without shareholder approval. Kozlowski

and Belnick arranged to sell 7.5 million shares of unauthorized Tyco stock for

a reported $450 million. These funds were smuggled out of the company, usually

disguised as executive bonuses or benefits. Kozlowski used the funds to further

his lavish lifestyle, which included handfuls of houses, an infamous $6,000

shower curtain and a $2 million birthday party for his wife. In early 2002, the

scandal slowly began to unravel and Tyco's share price plummeted nearly 80% in

a six-week period. The executives escaped their first hearing due to a

mistrial, but were eventually convicted and sentenced to 25 years in jail.

HealthSouth (NYSE: HLS), 2003 - Accounting for large corporations can be a

difficult task especially when your boss instructs you to falsify earnings

reports. In the late 1990s, CEO and founder Richard Scrushy began instructing

employees to inflate revenues and overstate HealthSouth's net income. At the

time, the company was one of America's largest healthcare service providers,

experiencing rapid growth and acquiring a number of other healthcare related

firms. The first sign of trouble surfaced in late 2002, when Scrushy reportedly

sold HealthSouth shares worth $75 million, prior to releasing an earnings loss.

An independent law firm concluded the sale was not directly related to the

loss, but investors should have taken the warning. The scandal unfolded in

March, 2003, when the SEC announced that HealthSouth exaggerated revenues by

$1.4 billion. The information came to light when CFO William Owens, working

with the FBI, taped caught Scrushy talking about the fraud. The repercussions

were swift, as the stock fell from a high of $20 to a close of $0.45 in a

single day. Amazingly, the CEO was acquitted of 36 counts of fraud, but was

later convicted on charges of bribery. Apparently, Scrushy arranged political

contributions of $500,000, allowing him to ensure a seat on the hospital

regulatory board.

Bernard Madoff, 2008

Making for what could be an awkward Christmas, Bernard Madoff, the former

chairman of the Nasdaq and founder of the market-making firm Bernard L. Madoff

Investment Securities, was turned in by his two sons and arrested on December

11, 2008, for allegedly running a Ponzi scheme. The 70-year-old kept his hedge

fund losses hidden by paying early investors with money raised from others.

This fund consistently recorded a 11% gain every year for 15 years. The fund's

supposed strategy, which was provided as the reason for these consistent

returns, was to use proprietary option collars that are meant to minimize

volatility. This scheme duped investors out of approximately US$50 billion.

Conclusion

The worst thing about these scams is that you never know until it's too late.

Those convicted of fraud might serve several years in prison, which in turn

costs investors/taxpayers even more money. These scammers can pick a lifetime's

worth of garbage and not even come close to repaying those who lost their

fortunes. The SEC works hard to prevent such scams from happening, but with

thousands of public companies in North America, it is nearly impossible to

ensure that disaster never strikes again.

Is there a moral to this story? Sure. Always invest with care and diversify,

diversify, diversify. Maintaining a well-diversified portfolio will ensure that

occurrences like these don't run you off the road, but instead remain mere

speed bumps on your path to financial independence.

For further reading, see the Investment Scams tutorial and Playing The Sleuth

In A Scandal Stock.

Playing The Sleuth In A Scandal Stock

The pervasiveness of business-related scandals has changed the way that many

analysts and investors think about corporate governance. For example, no longer

do senior executives get a free pass when they botch an acquisition or their

company misses earnings - they can be sued, along with their company, insurance

carrier and anyone else even remotely involved in event.

The good news is that an investor's willingness to hold management's feet to

the fire will probably lead to fewer corporate scandals going forward. But

there will always be rotten apples that will continue to manage recklessly and/

or just plain steal from their shareholders.

In any case, the possibility that a corporate scandal could emerge in the

future means that investors should be prepared, not only to investigate the

scandal on their own, but also to make their own assumptions based on the

potential damage to shareholder value and the underlying stock price. In this

article, we'll show you what to look for and how to keep a scandal from

tainting the value of your portfolio.

Take Matters Into Your Own Hands

Some will suggest that an investor would be better off leaving the

investigation (and the resulting valuation) up to the press and the analysts

that cover the company. In fact, there are a few reasons why an investor would

be wise to play the role of detective. The first, and probably the most

important, reason would be to preserve capital and to avoid "opportunity lost".

It could easily take weeks or even months for a journalist or analyst to fully

uncover the depths of a given scandal. By completing your own analysis on a

timely basis, you'll be able to get out of the stock in question before the

herd tries to sell. Furthermore, an investor's own analysis might find that the

scandal is not be as bad as the media has implied, providing investors with an

opportunity to get involved in the stock at a very low cost. (To read more

about this, see Common Clues Of Financial Statement Manipulation.)

Clues to Look For

There are several facets an investor should look at when analyzing a potential

scandal stock. First, the investor should try to determine exactly who is

involved and to what degree. Logic should dictate that if the chief executive

officer is involved, there may be others under that person that may have acted

as accomplices. If this is the case, the scandal (and the lies) will probably

multiply until the dust settles. Also, as a rule of thumb, the more elaborate

the deception and the more accomplices, the larger the dollar value of the

fraud. A great example of this was Enron, where the scandal spread from Ken Lay

and Jeff Skilling, to subordinates such as Andrew Fastow and a number of other

"C-suite" execs. (To learn more, see The Biggest Stock Scams Of All Time.)

Conversely, if a lower level manager looking to advance his or her career was

caught fudging the numbers, one might assume that this person may have been

acting alone or with only a few other minor accomplices. In other words, the

fraud is more likely to be contained, and less damaging to the overall

organization. For example, Raymond Stevenson, a former vice president of

taxation at Tyco, pleaded guilty in 2006 to failing to report more than $170

million in income on a 1999 Tyco International tax return. However, because the

shenanigans were essentially limited to one man and because Tyco is such a huge

company, most analysts agree that the company will survive.

Stock scandal sleuths should also pay attention to the portion of the company

the scandal encompasses. If it is the company's primary revenue source, one

could assume that the scandal could take an enormous toll on its financial

statements, and by proxy, its stock. On the flip side, as mentioned above, if

the scandal is limited to a smaller or discontinued operation, the likelihood

that the damage will be contained goes up significantly.

Check Out the Financials

Balance Sheet

After the major players and the divisions they represent are identified, the

next step is to analyze the company's financials. Specifically, an investor

should review the last balance sheet for several items. First, take a look at

how much cash the company has, because this will be its lifeline. Can the

company afford to weather inquiries from the major regulatory bodies and a

shareholder suit if one should emerge? If not, consider selling out the

position!For example, a large company with $9 billion in cash and cash

equivalents on its balance sheet would be in a much better position to weather

a scandal than a company with fewer assets and a smaller number, such as $309

million, on its balance sheet.

Liquidity

Next, calculate the company's liquidity situation by examining its current

ratio. The current ratio is calculated by dividing current assets by current

liabilities. This ratio will help you to determine what kind of breathing room

the company will have if things get real hairy. Depending on how conservative

you want the estimate to be, you can change the composition of the current

assets value. Keep in mind that not all short-term assets (such as inventory)

can be easily liquidated to pay off liabilities. For the most conservative

estimate, you can just use cash and cash equivalents as assets. (To learn more

about this ratio, see Do Your Investments Have Short-Term Health?)

In a current ratio, current assets should outnumber current liabilities by a

ratio of at least 2:1. If a company has a lower ratio, it will have an awfully

difficult time juggling its debts - not to mention a pile of legal bills - if

it is involved in a scandal.

Footprints in the Footnotes

Next, look at the accompanying footnotes to the financials in the company's

latest filings with the SEC. In those footnotes, the company may reveal whether

it holds an insurance policy that could offset some of the legal costs that

might arise in a scandal. Incidentally, these same footnotes may also reveal

whether the company has set aside any money in a reserve account for the same

purpose. An insurance policy and/or a reserve account would signal that at

least some sort of cushion exists that could protect the common shareholder.

(For related reading, see Footnotes: Start Reading The Fine Print and How To

Read Footnotes - Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.)

Assessing the Damage

The next goal for the investor should be to determine what the ultimate

financial impact of a scandal might be on a particular company. How many

quarters of earnings will need to be restated if any? Will the numbers being

restated be significantly askew from the new numbers?

Obviously, some guessing will be involved. By listening to the facts of the

case and doing one's own homework, the investor should be able to come up with

an educated guess. For example, when news broke that Enron's officers had been

masking debt by conducting a sizable number of off-balance sheet transactions

and booking revenues improperly, it could be assumed that multiple quarters

would be affected, and that the dollar amounts of fraud (while not precisely

quantifiable) would render previous earnings reports meaningless.

In some cases, it may be impossible to comprehend the potential future

financial impact of a scandal. In these instances, entire years of previously

filed financial statements may have to be restated.

Reaction to the Scandal

What should investor's do if they find themselves holding a scandal stock?

The only logical answer is to sell the stock and to avoid becoming involved

again unless and until the outlook for the company and the common shareholder

clears.

Bottom Line

Corporate scandals have and will continue to make headlines, but rather than

wait for the media to cover the event, investors should conduct their own

investigations in an effort to either preserve their capital and/or to isolate

an appropriate entry point into the stock before it rebounds.

by Glenn Curtis