Slashdot Mirror
IBM Says SEC Probing Its Accounting
chriscooper1470 writes "International Business Machines Corp. on Monday said that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission had begun a formal investigation of how the world's largest computer company accounted for some revenue in 2000 and 2001."
Contrary to my usual function, I'll actually try to avert a flame war here by bringing some pragmatism to /.
Before the leftist cries for massive oversight and regulation start spewing forth from the electronic abyss, let me remind you all, dear readers, that regulation is only going to make a bigger mess - look at Health Care. The regulatory code becomes the type of swiss cheese policy that only tends to lead to more violations, more investigations, and more spurious litigation all around. (That's a separate rant, as I work in the industry - I will elaborate if my case must be made that the Health Care financial situation is a mess, but I think most people realize that as fact.)
But no, you say, deregulation will give those heartless plutocrats the freedom to stomp all over us! Absolutely. What do we do? The hell if I know - but it seems clear to me that the answer lies in trying to simplify what is a corrupt, bloated mess.
Apart from causing fluctuations in IBM shares temporarily, I don't see how this will have any long term impact on IBM. :-)
Surely this has happened before. Many big business use as the article describes "aggressive accounting" for promoting confidence in investors. If you are an investor you better be aware of this.
Unless there are wide gaps in balance sheets of 2000 and 2001, which would mean a enron , worldcom like scenario, there is not much to worry about, i guess
But then I don't own any IBM shares either
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
As a search on Google shows an SEC probe has happened to a lot tech. of companies.
Other than the Fact that IBM is a major player in the SCO story, does this deserve a mention on the slashdot frontpage? Is this in any way an effort to slashdot the IBM share prices? Why does the submission come from somebody who has never earlier posted on slashdot
Did Iraq have WMD?
.ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
IBM also stated that the reason for the review is because the SEC is reviewing one of IBM's customers in its Retail division that sells cash registers. No biggie.
Oh I think that IBM has plenty of its own history with the government to not need Microsoft's help here. You do remember that 20 years ago they were the evil empire.
After all, a sleezy lawyer from SCO could claim IBM already is under investigation by the SEC for other issues of fraud. With this as well as IBM having auditors for the linux code being released would make SCO's case more credible.
Your right its not an enron or worldcom by far but it sill is damaging to their corporate image and deffinetly their stock price. I wonder what it will close at at the end of the day.
The gartner group recently advised all large bussinesses not to install Linux because of the SCO threat. With this and an sec investigation will also make corporate customers interested in IBM machines to put their purchases on the backburner to see what happens. IBM is heavily associated with Linux and I am sure its Linux server division hit a nose dive from the lawsuit as well.
If SCO loses this lawsuit I hope IBM, RedHat, Linuxtag, and SuSE all countersue them out of existance in return. They have losing serious money from the current lawsuit.
http://saveie6.com/
"This is big news because it goes back to the old accounting scandals that have shaken investor confidence, starting with Enron," said Burton Schlichter, senior market analyst with Lind-Waldock & Co., a division of Refco LLC.
That isn't a fair statement. The SEC's issue with IBM is qualitatively different.
Enron created a number of derivative exchanges for gas distribution and pretended they were balanced and immune. This would have been fine if they just ran the boards like the NYSE. But Enron failed to remain neutral and took positions. If anyone's bought on margin or bought a derivative, you know (I hope) that you could lose way more than you've invested. There are two reasons to buy derivatives: to hedge or to speculate. Hedging decreases total risk, for a cost. Speculation increases potential reward, but also can greatly increases risk.
I don't think IBM is operating a secret dervative trading board.
Worldcom spent large amounts in start-up costs building physical networks and did not report these expenditures as current period expenses. Instead they deferred these to future peiods where they hoped they'd make money on the new grids. You're only allowed to defer reporting costs if there's a very good chance of paying them later. It's the principle of matching expenses to work/revenue. When the telecom bubble burst recognition dawned that all these expenses could not be matched with probable revenue.
IBM hasn't been creating huge new infrastructures at vast expenses. The SEC specifically mentioned revenue.
The other bad thing Enron and Worldcom did was to grant stock options to their executives and not show as an expense the increasing value of these. Again this is an underreporting of expense issue.
It sounds like a scare tactic to influence IBM's share price and drum up some trading fees.
Esteem isn't a zero sum game
Have you bought anything made in the USA?
Damn you, you're responsible for funding the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Bought German beer lately? Nazi.
Diamonds? Nothing like genocide in Africa, eh?
A car? So you don't care about the Earth, either?
Wanna play the blame game? You're responsible for backing horrible deeds yourself, just by purchasing any product on the market.
I do love the bit about the founder. Maybe one day you'll wake up and realize that, hey - despite what Congress says, corporations ain't people.
In communism, man exploits man. In capitalism, it's the other way around.
MORTAR COMBAT!
Why would this be considered questionable business conduct? Think of the auto industry. I've heard that GM actually loses money for each Chevy Cavalier/Pontiac Sunfire it sells. The idea is that you build customer brand loyalty by selling the car, even at a loss.
Or consider Oracle. It is rumored that they offer their application software at a major discount, in order to steal customers away from SAP, PeopleSoft and/or Siebel. Then, they can make big $ on the Database software.
Assuming that IBM gave away the POS equipment, they are only trying to build loyalty to the services organization (where profits are higher). You call it *questionable*. I call it *running a business*.