12.07.2015 Views

Footnote 8

Footnote 8

Footnote 8

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

investment that was not at risk and enabled the Insiders to buy back the Fishtail equity interest thathad been supported by Chase and LJM2 and also allowing the Insiders to improperly keep$375 million of debt off of Enron’s balance sheet.697. Both Barclays and CSFB facilitated the September 2001 Prepaid Oil SwapTransaction CSFB loaned ENA $150 million, and Barclays served as the pass-through entity.698. Both Barclays and CSFB facilitated the Nikita FAS 140 transaction. Barclays wasto purchase and hold the “equity” certificate in the SPE created for this transaction, but at theeleventh hour was unable to do so, for regulatory reasons. CSFB agreed to step in and purchase the“equity” in the SPE but, as a condition of doing so, CSFB required Barclays to enter into a totalreturn swap, guaranteeing to CSFB the return of its “equity” investment. Barclays, in turn, knewthat it had no “equity” exposure in the transaction, as the Insiders had promised that the equityinvestment would be repaid by Enron.6. The Bank Defendants’ Participation In The Insiders’ Scheme CausedSubstantial Loss to Enron.699. By knowingly assisting the Insiders in manipulating and misstating Enron’s financialcondition, the Bank Defendants caused Enron to suffer enormous injury. Individually, and certainlycollectively, the participation of the Bank Defendants was essential to the Insiders’ far-reachingscheme to manipulate Enron’s financial condition and artificially maintain Enron’s credit ratings,all of which enabled the Insiders to improperly obtain personal benefits from transactions with thecompany and to conceal their acts of past mismanagement. Without the prepay, FAS 140, minorityinterest, tax and other transactions designed, implemented, and in many cases financed by the BankDefendants, the Insiders would not have been able to conceal from the rating agencies and othersEnron’s true financial condition, and their scheme would have collapsed. As the Enron Examinerconcluded, “At least by 1999, and perhaps earlier, Enron’s continued success was dependent upon604041v1/007457-241-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!