Comments on: Ted Oglove’s thoughts on the current mess… http://www.footnoted.com/earnings-quality/ted-ogloves-thoughts-on-the-current-mess/ Morningstar's guide to what's hiding in SEC filings Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:24:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Michelle Leder http://www.footnoted.com/earnings-quality/ted-ogloves-thoughts-on-the-current-mess/comment-page-1/#comment-6236 Michelle Leder Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:39:45 +0000 http://www.footnoted.com/?p=2571#comment-6236 @ Jo: The bill that replaced Glass-Steagall in 1999 was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which was introduced by Senator Phil Gramm and Reps. Jim Leach and Tom Bliley. In the Senate, it was passed along mostly partisan lines, but in the House, the bill rec'd bipartisan support and was signed by Clinton. Haven't looked at the lobbyist contributions, but I'm sure it would be interesting. @ Jo: The bill that replaced Glass-Steagall in 1999 was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which was introduced by Senator Phil Gramm and Reps. Jim Leach and Tom Bliley. In the Senate, it was passed along mostly partisan lines, but in the House, the bill rec’d bipartisan support and was signed by Clinton. Haven’t looked at the lobbyist contributions, but I’m sure it would be interesting.

]]> By: Jo McIntyre http://www.footnoted.com/earnings-quality/ted-ogloves-thoughts-on-the-current-mess/comment-page-1/#comment-6233 Jo McIntyre Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:03:57 +0000 http://www.footnoted.com/?p=2571#comment-6233 Mr. Oglove says 'banking lobbyists' wrote the most recent regulatory law, but who were the Congress people who introduced the bill? Who got the most contributions from those lobbyists? Clinton signed the bill, but was it in spite of misgivings, or did he support the law wholeheartedly? I think if we are to get to the bottom of this mess, we need to hold the lawmakers and executives responsible for passing and administering the laws that let it happen. Mr. Oglove says ‘banking lobbyists’ wrote the most recent regulatory law, but who were the Congress people who introduced the bill? Who got the most contributions from those lobbyists? Clinton signed the bill, but was it in spite of misgivings, or did he support the law wholeheartedly?

I think if we are to get to the bottom of this mess, we need to hold the lawmakers and executives responsible for passing and administering the laws that let it happen.

]]> By: Joe A http://www.footnoted.com/earnings-quality/ted-ogloves-thoughts-on-the-current-mess/comment-page-1/#comment-6226 Joe A Wed, 17 Sep 2008 06:03:42 +0000 http://www.footnoted.com/?p=2571#comment-6226 Michelle, another great post. I'm picking up "Quality of Earnings" tomorrow from the library. Thanks. Michelle,

another great post. I’m picking up “Quality of Earnings” tomorrow from the library. Thanks.

]]> By: Michelle Leder http://www.footnoted.com/earnings-quality/ted-ogloves-thoughts-on-the-current-mess/comment-page-1/#comment-6225 Michelle Leder Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:32:14 +0000 http://www.footnoted.com/?p=2571#comment-6225 I'm as confused as you are, G-man, as to why the book value would be so high, so if anyone can help out here, I'm all ears. I know that Yahoo numbers aren't always accurate, but they're usually close and this is way off. As for the comment on earnings, I won't be able to say it as succinctly as Ted, but I believe what he means is that by just paying attention to earnings, as in the actual number, without paying attention to the quality of those earnings -- what's in the stew, so to speak -- is pretty much useless for assessing a company's health. One of the first things I remember Ted telling me 6 years ago was that you could have two identical companies (keep in mind this was a hypothetical since there aren't two companies that are exactly the same) and company A could report 75 cents in earnings while Company B reported $1.50 in earnings. The difference was in the company's (and their lawyers and accountants) interpretation of GAAP and other rules. I’m as confused as you are, G-man, as to why the book value would be so high, so if anyone can help out here, I’m all ears. I know that Yahoo numbers aren’t always accurate, but they’re usually close and this is way off.

As for the comment on earnings, I won’t be able to say it as succinctly as Ted, but I believe what he means is that by just paying attention to earnings, as in the actual number, without paying attention to the quality of those earnings — what’s in the stew, so to speak — is pretty much useless for assessing a company’s health.

One of the first things I remember Ted telling me 6 years ago was that you could have two identical companies (keep in mind this was a hypothetical since there aren’t two companies that are exactly the same) and company A could report 75 cents in earnings while Company B reported $1.50 in earnings. The difference was in the company’s (and their lawyers and accountants) interpretation of GAAP and other rules.

]]> By: joe http://www.footnoted.com/earnings-quality/ted-ogloves-thoughts-on-the-current-mess/comment-page-1/#comment-6224 joe Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:23:10 +0000 http://www.footnoted.com/?p=2571#comment-6224 What does he mean by that, "earnings don't mean anything anymore"? What does he mean by that, “earnings don’t mean anything anymore”?

]]> By: G-man http://www.footnoted.com/earnings-quality/ted-ogloves-thoughts-on-the-current-mess/comment-page-1/#comment-6223 G-man Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:44:19 +0000 http://www.footnoted.com/?p=2571#comment-6223 Can someone explain how the book value of LEH shares are still worth $35? No really, please explain. Can someone explain how the book value of LEH shares are still worth $35? No really, please explain.

]]>