Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Why Enron Went Bankrupt - Lessons To Learn. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 12 page report on the Enron Corporation bankruptcy. This paper discusses the players in the Enron debacle and their roles, for instance, the role of the chief financial officer and the role of the auditor. The writer discusses the strategies that were used to hide the company's debt and the accounting tactics used that led analysts and the public to believe that the company was very profitable. One such tactic was moving assets back and forth between Enron and contrived 'partnerships.' Bibliography lists 10 sources.
Page Count:
12 pages (~225 words per page)
File: MM12_PGenrn2.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
Dorgan said, "We dont seem to have got any closer... well have to keep digging" (Saragosa, 2002). Three witnesses had testified and gave three distinctly different stories about what had
happened at the company (Saragosa, 2002). As might be expected, the hearing sometimes lapsed into a round of mud-slinging and finger-pointing by the witnesses towards the other witnesses (Saragosa, 2002).
Jeffrey Skilling, a former chief executive of Enron, arrogantly insisted that he had done nothing wrong during his tenure as chief executive officer (Saragosa, 2002). Skilling insisted that the
collapse was the result of a "classic run on the bank" (Saragosa, 2002). This excuse did nothing but rile the other two witnesses, which led to mud-slinging (Saragosa, 2002). Skillings
testimony was far afield from that of the other witnesses that day (Saragosa, 2002). The fact that all three of the witnesses, Skilling, Jeffrey McMahon, chief operating officer, and
Sherron Watkins, the person who finally blew the whistle on the company, were all seated at the same table (Saragosa, 2002). Skilling consistently denied any knowledge of any financial problems
in the company but both McMahon and Watkins alleged they had both alerted Skilling to the problems that were brewing and he ignored their warnings (Saragosa, 2002). Skilling insisted that
since he was not an accountant himself, he should not be expected to know or understand any of the complex transactions he had personally approved - that was his defense
(Saragosa, 2002). He would not agree with the Senators on the panel that as chief executive officer, it was his responsibility to understand anything he signed and approved (Saragosa, 2002).
Senators also fired questions at both Skilling and McMahon about a discussion they had had about the complexity of the financial arrangements for the company and the two gave entirely
...