Talk:Jeffrey Skilling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Urgent and important articles are bold

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

New Trial?[edit]

I believe the case was remanded to the Appellate Court rather than a new trial ordered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Probable Correction[edit]

Given the dubious nature of this quote, why include it in the article? Other than a gratuitous opportunity to say "fucking," what does it add beyond pointless vulgarity?

The quotation "fucking smart" is in Power Failure, the book by Swartz and Watkins. However, it does seem unlikely to be accurate, and was likely included only in some attempt at verbal machismo (the illusion that cursing makes one gritty or tough).

It is highly doubtful that Jeff Skilling was interviewed by Harvard Business School and therefore, that he stated that he was "fucking smart". I was in Jeff's 1979 section, and to my knowledge nobody interviewed for admission that year. At the time the School believed that interviews had the potential to create adverse impact on protected classes.

While I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt, the "fucking smart" statement was in the documentary The Smartest Guys in the Room. You can dispute this, but try to find a source.Coleca 02:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The book on which the film is based reports this story, and says explicitly that the interview of Skilling was by the Dean of HBS and was held at Houston's Hyatt Hotel. According to the book, these Houston interviews were with middling candidates (those about whom HBS was undecided), so it is possible that such candidates were the only ones interviewed. See: "The Smartest Guys in the Room" by Bethany McLean and Peter Elkind (Penguin, 2003), page 31. Both authors are senior writers with Fortune Magazine, normally a reputable source. 2006-07-19.
  • Yeah, I caught that too (HBS had stopped admissions interviews several years before Skilling got there). My guess is that what happened is that he said that to an HBS admissions recruiter that came by SMU. HBS does that all the time, to try to get the number of applications up. They visited my school, and I spoke to them, but it had nothing to do with whether you got in or not.
Mid-May 1976 my roommate happened to "interview" with a newish Dean of Admissions for HBS who was visiting our school. The roommate was thinking of changing and focusing his career path (from double majoring business/econ with a profession) & going immediately to a lesser graduate business program without taking the senior year, at a time that combo programs were not readily available. We were both finishing juniors at a well known school. My roommate was an outstanding student, even at an extremely selective school. He worked two weeks on his application and was accepted at HBS that summer, entered that fall, graduated spring 1978, top ~10%. He is also pretty well off now. Say what you will about HBS not interviewing, that conversation made a great difference...-- 08:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
    • My conclusion is that the Skilling "fucking smart" interview allegation remains at least suspicious, perhaps a deliberate misrepresentation. What are my “sources” for this conclusion?

Well, I've just finished watching the movie "The Smartest Guys in the Room" and feel that all of this banter about whether or not he said it or not and asking for proof is all superfluous because either way it is very suitable given the character of the man; Jeffrey Skilling. The words spoken by this man should not be verified for authenticity anyway because he is not an up-standing citizen and most of his words are lies therefore it really doesn't matter if he said it or not because he lies mostly anyway. I think that he said it, and i also think that for all of you to wonder whether or not he actually said it is very childish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

We know the School’s position in 1977 was that it did not consider interviews in the admission process in order to avoid discriminatory impact on minorities. The source for this fact is the School's 1977 admission application form, which is explicit on the matter. Further, we know that the School declined applicants' requests for interviews during that time because I made such a request and was turned down, as were those of the many classmates with whom I later discussed the topic

But The Smartest Guys in the Room maintains that not only did the School conduct an admissions interview with Skilling, he was granted an audience with the Dean. The book maintains that this privilege was reserved for those who were, in the eyes of the School, “on the fence’ (page 31). That year, like every year, there were tens of thousands of HBS applicants and thousands of them end up on waiting lists, on deferred admissions, invited to re-apply, etc. So the Dean must have been a very busy guy personally interviewing hundreds of people like Skilling in an explicit violation of his employer’s published anti-discrimination policies.

Speaking of sources, what’s the source for the book’s “fucking smart” quote anyway? Who was the eye-witness? Or was the source Skilling or the HBS Dean? The book’s authors’ are oddly mute on the subject. Considering the importance of the quote to the title of the book (“fucking smart” vs. “The Smartest Guys in the Room”), one would think they’d be a bit more forthcoming. Please don’t tell me, as someone does above, that the source of the “fucking smart” quote is the book in which it’s quoted.

Last is the issue of Fortune Magazine reporter credibility, also raised above. It is common knowledge that Fortune is the most anti-business of the major business magazines. For a source on this observation, read the magazine. (October 3, 2006.)**


Well, I'm an idiot and reverted a reversion to blah blah blah. In any event, should intimations of consipiracy concerning the mutual fraternity of Lay and Skilling be mentioned? It is interesting, but I'm skeptical it's anything but a coincidence unless some evidence exists to the contrary. Coleca 04:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

  • If true, since they are frat brothers, it could be more than coincidental. Further research is needed to confirm or refute it. Wahkeenah 05:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Why not just stick to the facts: they were both members of the Beta Theta Pi fraternity, and Lay DID recruit Skilling. Don’t get into speculation. The problem here is that the people taking down this comment are from the Beta Theta Pi page (obviously a members of the fraternity), and they do not want Beta Theta Pi mentioned on this page, so they keep deleting any mention of it. Over on the Beta Theta Pi page, they are policing the page nonstop, and both Lay and Skilling are listed as business leaders (for example, Skilling is listed as “former CEO of Enron”). Somebody put up “former CEO of Enron and convicted felon”, and it got taken down. They don’t want anything negative about their fraternity on Wikipedia (somebody said on the Beta Theta Pi discussion page that it was being used as a “cheerleading” page). That’s why it keeps getting taken down on this page. That’s the problem here – not whether it is a coincidence or not.

Please provide any evidence that the membership in the same fraternity had ANYTHING to with the recruitment. This isn't Skull and Bones. The "trivia" you are trying to include is not verifiable and it is meant to imply something that no one can say with certainty is true. They both drink coffee yet there is no mention that they are both coffee drinkers in the trivia section. They happened to belong to the same fraternity years apart and at different schools. That is merely coincidental. It is not germain to any of this. (And this has nothing to do with cheerleading. This is merely about sticking to VERIFIABLE FACTS that actually pertain to the issue and the fraternity membership has nothing to do with it). Rrude 15:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

  • You seem a bit touchy about this oddity. Then again, so does the a-none. Wahkeenah 15:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with it being included if it can be proved that membership in the same fraternity had anything to do with the recruitment. But, if it can not be verified then it has no business being in here as it would have nothing to do with the situation. I have taken it to (sorry, I'm not completely proficient with everything here at Wikipedia yet) and will glady discuss it here or there. Rrude 15:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I do not agree that it does not qualify as "trivia" that they are in the same fraternity. However, the mere mention of it implies a connection, as you indicate. So until there is further evidence, mentioning it in "trivia" would seem to require the qualification that "there is no known connection", in which case there is almost no point in mentioning it. Interesting coincidence is trivia. But I think whoever is posting it is trying to draw an inference where there is (so far) none verifiable. Of course, they might end up being "frat brothers" in a federal pen, but that's another story. >:) Wahkeenah 15:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

What you say makes sense. However, I would like to add that if they both happen to be fans of opera or the Chicago Cubs or both drove a Lexus does that really matter? It just really has nothing to do with the situation and is not necessary in an encyclopedia description. The problem is that (like you said) an inference is trying to be drawn here against the fraternity as if there is some sort of connection between the fraternity and corruption. That's just not the case. I am disgusted by Lay and Skilling and their actions. However, their actions had nothing to do with a coincidental membership in the same organization (despite what all the conspiracy theorists who love to harp on fraternal organizations) want to imply. Rrude 16:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I don't know that you can say their being in the same fraternity had nothing to do with one hiring the other. However, even if their fraternity relationship give him an "edge" in getting the job, it has nothing verifiably to do with the scandal. They could just as easily have stonewalled whether they were in the same frat or not. Wahkeenah 16:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I can't say (and no one else can either) that it did or did not have anything to do with the hiring. The implication though is that the fraternity membership DID have something to do with it and, in the real world, things just don't work like that (most of the time). People think that there is some big secret oath that fraternity men have to do anything and everything for a fraternity brother and that is simply not the case. These two did not commit crimes because they were in the same fraternity or because they were in a fraternity in the first place. Their crimes are because of their own actions and not because of a club membership 20 years (or so) prior. Rrude 16:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Claiming that Skilling belonged to a particular fraternity seems factual and verifiable. Why not just stick to this and let the reader draw (perhaps hasty) conclusions? Coleca 18:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
It is already noted under the personal life section of the article that he was a member of the fraternity while in college. Rrude 19:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
But it doesn't note there that he and Lay were both in Beta Theta Pi. Why are you trying to be so politically correct? We know you are from Beta Theta Pi, but what you are doing is shameful. Do you guys really have to stoop to this??? How old are you?
Arturo Ritti, please stop vandalizing the pages in your crusade for revenge against Skilling and Lay. You are not posting verifiable facts. Can you verify that he was hired because he was in the same fraternity? No? Then it is not varifiable and is giving misleading information dcesigned to impugn a reputation. What Skilling and Lay did was shameful but if had nothing to do with them being members of the same fraternity years apart and at different schools. It just doesn't work like that. Rrude 23:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Some Googling on the subject shows no evidence (other than sites mirroring wikipedia) that make any connection between the Beta Theta Pi fraternity and Skilling's hiring. Wikipedia itself indicates he had been with a consulting firm for awhile, which happened to work with Enron, so when Skilling was hired, it may well have been just an unhappy coincidence. In fact, Lay abruptly left Enron and put Skilling in charge, ultimately ensuring that Skilling would take the fall with him. Is that any way for one "frat brother" to treat another? I think not. So I am pretty well convinced that their membership in the same fraternity is nothing more than "trivia"... but because its presence carries an implication with no foundation, it should only be listed with the word coincidentally in front of it. Then, if that other user takes the qualifier away, his point-of-view pushing will reveal itself. If he leaves it alone, fine. Wahkeenah 23:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
All you need to do to see his point-of-view pushing is go look at the edits he has done under User:, User:, User:, User:, User:, User: and others that myself and others have found him using and have included various anti-semetic remarks and editing only on Lay & Skilling related pages. Rrude 00:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I can't tell if they are really the same guy or not, but I haven't researched it as thoroughly as you have. In any case, I added your further qualification on the Skilling page to the revised entry on the Lay page. However, I'm not sure that specific argument holds water. Being members of a national fraternity could theoretically give someone an edge with another member of the same fraternity. However, as I said before, I don't see anyone besides this site and its mimics making anything of this. If there were something to it and/or if it mattered, some actual news source would have picked up on it by now. And, realistically, why does it matter why Lay hired Skilling? Unless that writer is not trying to besmirch those two as such, but the fraternity itself. That might be the case, in fact. However, there might also be a point to his charge that you are trying to "protect" the fraternity. However, anybody who bothers to watch the news knows who Skilling and Lay are, and pointing out on the frat page that they are convicted felons might be overkill. However, that might be enough "howevers" for now. It is worth pointing out that cutting that trivia back again to merely "Lay recruited Skilling" would be repetitive from the rest of both articles, and thus would not need to be mentioned again standalone. Anyway, let's wait and see what happens next, if anything. Wahkeenah 01:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I have reluctantly taken the view that we are going to have to include some form of Beta Theta Pi's editorializing. It looks stupid, but, hey, what can we expect from a "public" encyclopedia. Anti-semitic remarks???? You've gotta be kidding. So noting that Robert Rubin is jewish is anti-semitic??? That's pretty rich. And, no, my name is not "Arturo Ritti". I can't believe you bought that screen name as being my own. It's a takeoff from the word "arthritis". Duh. You guys are funny, though. I'll give you that. But you can keep on calling me "Arturo Ritti" if you want to. Hee, hee, hee, hee.
  • Message to Wahkeenah - You wrote, "In fact, Lay abruptly left Enron and put Skilling in charge, ultimately ensuring that Skilling would take the fall with him." Are you sure about this? My understanding is that it was the other way around. My understanding is that Lay was taking a less active role when he the ceded the CEO spot to Lay - that Lay, being older, was doing what most CEOs his age do, i.e. remains just as chairman, perhaps still keeps an office at the company, retains use of the company jet, etc. And then I thought it was SKILLING who landed LAY into the mess when Skilling abruptly quit, and Lay ended up having to come back and take day-to-day control, which literally resulted in Lay's crimes - to wit: Lay's crimes almost entirely (totally?) occurred AFTER he came back and took over the reins again as CEO - that's when he made all the false statements to employees and investors. Point being, if Lay had "stayed above the fray" and had never made any public statements (it would have been better if he had even retired six months before the bankruptcy), then he might have walked away from the whole thing unscathed. Skilling, however, abruptly quit claiming he wanted to "spend more time with his family", which everybody knew was a joke because he had just gotten through divorcing his wife and was single at the time. Skilling got convicted on PRIOR knowledge of the fraud. There was no evidence that Lay had prior knowledge of the fraud. Thus, I thought it was a common conclusion that Skilling basically stabbed Lay in the back (nice going, fellow Beta Theta Pi fraternity brother), i.e. left him with the mess. But you write the opposite, that Lay ensured that Skilling took the fall. I don't understand this. And that LAY abruptly left Enron (not true). The above is also why I don't understand why Lay stuck with Skilling in the trial - if I was Lay, I would have blamed Skilling and would taken a plea bargain and cooperated against Skilling. But, no, Lay stuck with Skilling (because he was a fellow Beta???) and, as a result, will probably spend the rest of his life in prison/die in prison. If I was Lay, I'd be livid over what happened, i.e. spend the rest of your life in prison because of a few public statements you made during a 4-month period - all because your fellow fraternity brother quit on you in the middle of the night and left you with the mess (which, we now know, Skilling had prior knowledge of). Anyway, it was surprizing to read your statement that Lay "ensured" that Skilling would "take the fall with him". You're the first person I know of that has that viewpoint.
    • I'm just going by what the article said. I'm not an expert on the nuts-and-bolts of the Enron scandal like you are. Wahkeenah 07:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Which article said THAT???
  • That one a-none finally played his real hand, his true agenda, by adding a bunch of sarcasm to the statement of it being coincidental. It is now clear that the only reason the a-none posted that is to deride the fraternity. Therefore, it has no business being in the "trivia" section. Wahkeenah 03:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Wahkeenah has finally agreed that there should be no editorializing in this section, just a statement of the facts. This point is now agreed.
  • I agree that you betrayed your true intention, which is to somehow link the Enron scandal with that fraternity. Since there is no other reason to post that "trivia", it's irrelevant to the article. Wahkeenah 07:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't assign your own ideas of "intentions" to somebody else. In any event, intentions are moot (look that words up on Wiktionary). You have given no reason why the facts should not be stated. Just stick to facts, and leave out your motives, and anybody else's. This is not what Wikipedia is about. You are vandalizing it.
  • You have been cited for vandalizing various articles, so your actions speak for themselves. Wahkeenah 07:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Explain why you think it's relevant. Wahkeenah 07:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, by your reasoning, virtually all "Trivia" should be removed from Wikipedia articles. But, nonetheless, it does seem a great coincidence that (1) these two guys were members of the same fraternity, (2) one recruited the other, (3) they both ended up at the top of this corrupt company, in the #1 and #2 spots, (4) they were some of the very few who took it to trial, and (5) they stuck together in their defenses, even when it would seem that Lay should have plea-bargained and flipped against Skilling, but instead he has taken it on the chin and court observers think it is likely that he will die in prison as a result of sticking with Skilling. Why did this guy do this??? Also, the culture of an organisation is set by the guys at the top, and these two guys were at the top, and they were from the same fraternity, and they set a culture of corruption, self-dealing and insider trading - that's why there are so many convictions, i.e. it wasn't just one rotten apple - the whole place was laced with corruption. But, nonetheless, maybe we better not mention the coincidence on Skilling's page. Perhaps it would be also be best to delete Skilling's and Lay's name from the Beta Theta Pi page - after all, it could interfere with recruiting. This is why Wikipedia will never be a responsible source - because negative items always get deleted from Wikipedia pages. You generally only get the positive when reading a Wikipedia page. It's inevitable, simply because - for example - the Beta Theta Pi page is policed almost exclusively by members of that fraternity. Do you think you would ever read anything negative on that page? No way. That's why Wikipedia is being criticized in news articles these days - because if an article deals with a PERSON or an ORGANISATION, then the article is going to be biased - because it is policed by either that person's family/friends, or that organisation's members. Think about it - you can't even mention on the Jeff Skilling page that he was recruited by somebody in the same fraternity he was in. The whole thing is laughable. It makes Wikipedia a laughable source.
  • You're getting in the neighborhood of explaining what your complaint is, but you're not there yet. You're trying to somehow infer that this fraternity somehow bears some responsibility for Enron. Even if it's true that the one one hired the other due to frat connections (which you have not demonstrated), what does it have to do with anything? People get hired all the time due to "connections". So what? Wahkeenah 09:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • (1) I am not trying to infer that this fraternity somehow bears some responsibility for Enron. YOU are drawing that conclusion. Take responsibility for drawing an improper conclusion. (2) And I never said that Lay hired Skilling because of a frat connection. YOU are saying that. I doubt if it would ever been that clear-cut. I would guess that it was a combination of a whole host of reasons, i.e. Skilling's work at McKinsey, Skilling's supposed knowledge of the gas industry, Skilling's ability to get along with Lay, and who knows, perhaps his frat connection was like icing on the cake. But I'm not saying that. We don't know. But at least point out the coincidence - or you don't want the public to know that, for some reason. And please stop vandalizing the page. You have reset the sentencing date back to September. It's not September any longer, it's October. Think before you vandalize.
  • What is your purpose in pointing out this coincidence? Wahkeenah 09:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • It is a "Trivia" coincidence. If Lay actually hired Skilling specifically because Skilling was also in Beta Theta Pi, then I would say it shouldn't be put under "Trivia", but should be part of a discussion of Lay's management style. We don't know if there is any significance to this coincidence - that is for a member of the public or a reporter/author to further investigate. But something is wrong if bare facts can't be reported in Wikipedia. Just stick to bare facts and leave personal opinion out of it. The bare facts are that they ARE both members of that fraternity, and Lay DID recruit Skilling to Enron. Just leave it at that, no personal opinion in it, none of that garbage that they want to put up (e.g., "this is purely a coincidence", etc, etc - we actually don't know if it is just a coincidence or not)
  • Give me a reason why you do not want this coincidence reported at all in Wikipedia.
  • Your earlier comments betray that it is not"bare fact" to you, it's significant. But you have no proof, just personal prejudice. And it is not true that it's "not reported". Those two guys are listed right on the frat page, or at least they were. Wahkeenah 09:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • The fact that it is in "Trivia" means that it is insignificant, so don't put words in my mouth. Proof? Of WHAT???? I advocate just stating facts, and nothing else. As for it being listed on the frat page - a lot of people aren't going to go to every link on the Skilling page and then read all the other pages. But, actually, what you say supports my point - if it's listed there, there's no reason why it can't be listed here. Thanks for that.
  • It's already in the article, and it's covered in the fraternity page. Listing it separately is purposeful overkill on your part. Wahkeenah 09:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry, but what you said is not true - it is not mentioned in the article that they are both in Beta Theta Pi. If in your personal vision of Wikipedia you think this is overkill, I suggest deleting the references on the frat page.
  • Explain why you think it's so bloody important to bring up this fact. Explain your personal agenda. It's obvious what it is, it's just not obvious why. Wahkeenah 10:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • No personal agenda - just stating facts. It's not material - that's why I put it in "Trivia". We actually don't know if it was a coincidence or not, but the public (who reads Wikipedia) should at least be notified of the association. As it stands, you would have to read Lay's page and then read Skilling's page, and then make the connection yourself. Why not simply list the connection under "Trivia"? Look, I know members of the Beta Theta Pi fraternity are not going to want that. But that's tough. Live with it.
  • We do not have to "live" with your agenda. You are trying to imply that he was hired simply because he was in the same fraternity and you have NO proof whatsoever that he was hired because of this which is what you want everyone to believe. Misleading people is not what Wikipedia is for and that is what you want to do. You have a personal agenda against Skilling, against Lay, against Beta Theta Pi and against Jewish people. Your posts have made that very clear. Be gone with your anti-semtic and hateful postings Arturo Rittu. Rrude 17:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Your rant is barely understandable. Why is the word "live" in quotes? Where did I or anybody else use this word? Secondly, you keep inferring an "agenda". There is no agenda. Surely you must know this by now, by my additional edits to this page, i.e. my knowledge of Enron events, my knowing about the "suicide interview". My purpose for being here? As I stated once before, I'm an investment banker by trade, and Enron was a client of my bank, and these bozos came to us and pitched a crooked deal to us. I PERSONALLY turned the deal down (because it was crooked). That's why I'm here. I only started putting edits into Wikipedia for the first time about 60 days ago. But you guys are Wikipedia addicts - even when you don't know the subject matter at hand (like I do). The bit about the two of them being Beta Theta Pi members was an aside - that's why I put it under "Trivia". Is it a coincidence? Probably. But we don't know. Personally, my guess is that Skilling was hired for a variety of reasons, i.e. (1) probably primarily because he appeared to know what he was talking about when he was McKinsey partner, (2) Lay was probably desperate for somebody who would be a "saviour", a "savant" who could produce better than average profits (which Lay apparently could not do), and then there were probably minor items such as (3) Skilling's ability to get along with top management, and then an extremely minor thing, which was probably just icing on the cake (4) Skilling was a member of Beta Theta Pi. I highly doubt if Skilling's being a Beta was anything more than 5% of the reason why Lay hired Skilling - having worked in the businesses they were in (or, at least, the investment banking side of it), I can guarantee you that nobody gets hired based on what fraternity that they are/were in. Five percent is probably being generous. Probably close to zero. It's just icing on the cake. Hiring somebody in that position is like travelling on train from Point A to Point B - the train can't move unless all the lights are green. All the lights would have had to have been green in order for Skilling to have been hired. Being a member of Beta Theta Pi would NOT have been one of those lights. But it was probably a nice touch. Sort of like travelling first class rather than coach. But that's not why the train moved, why the train moved out of the station. Still, is there anything wrong in pointing out the COINCIDENCE (NOT saying there is a cause-and-effect relationship). Is there any problem pointing out that they travelled first class, not coach? You guys are really touchy. In my opinion, you are degrading Wikipedia's honesty and usefullness to the public. Surely Beta Theta Pi is not so weak that it cannot withstand this entry in Wikipedia? Think about it. If you are a member of Beta Theta Pi, I would think that you would say, "Sure, put it in there, we're a lot more than these two guys". But apparently not. Just my opinion.
  • You accused me of being anti-semetic. Show one place where I have ever said anything of the sort. I can show you where you have said anti-semetic and homophobic things. they were when you used ip address Rrude 02:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • You also accused me of being anti-semitic without proof, so I just threw it back at you. Grow up.
  • Okay, you've got me to finally register. I'm registered as "Betathetapi545". You can call me "Arturo Ritti" if you want to. You can call me on the phone if you want to (although, nobody has had the nerve or the nickel to do that so far) - my telephone number if called from the States is 011-44-7952-596827. This Novasource guy has put up a second number that is not mine. Call the above number and you will reach me. This Novasource guy (I can't believe that he is over 30 years of age) claims, in addition to a bogus telephone number for me, that I live in Midhurst, Surrey, England. And that I am a Pakistani. That's pretty rich. Fine. My guess is that he is jealous of anybody that is an "investment banker", as he knows I am. A lot of people are like that. We are used to that.
  • Your posts under gave you away. Your comments above about throwing it back in my face prove you are nothing but a vandal. We will not be calling you. You are a vandal. You are not a Beta. Rrude 02:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Idiot. I never said I was a Beta. You obviously are. I said I am an investment banker. Yes, I know you will not be calling me, because you don't have the nickel to do so. Send me your telephone number to and I will call you. I have the nickel to do so.
  • You are a vandal pushing a POV. All of your POV's will be deleted as long as you continue to push your agenda, insult, call names, post anti-semetic and homophobic remarks. End of discussion. Rrude 02:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, you can say that I am an Alaskan Eskimo, but that doesn't mean it is true, not without some sort of proof. I am not a vandal pushing a POV. I have pared it down the bare facts, i.e. "Skilling was recruited to Enron by fellow Beta Theta Pi fraternity brother Ken Lay". Those are the simple facts. That does NOT mean that Lay recruited Skilling mainly BECAUSE he is a Beta. It is just a recitiation of fact. As stated above (which you undoubtedly did not read), it was probably just "icing on the cake", thus I put it under "Trivia". But, to you, this a major offense - probably because being a Beta is the major focus in your life at the moment. Hey, how much money do you have in your bank account? You can't even afford to call me (and I put my number up in public). LOL!
    • The only reason to bring it up is to infer a connection, and you have already argued for their being a connection, so you're only fooling yourself. You're also doing a great job of selling yourself as an investment banker that someone would want to trust their nickels with. Of course, you might be exaggerating. My brother in law has a high-profile job, too. He's a diamond cutter. He mows the lawn at Yankee Stadium. Wahkeenah 03:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
    • There are at least three people deleting your vandalism. The three of us appear to all agree that your post should not be on the page. There is nothing further to discuss. Rrude 03:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Doesn't matter how many Betas are reversing my edits. I'm sure if they put this in their monthly Beta letter that we would have a thousand people deleting rather than three, i.e. your point is meaningless. Why don't you answer my questions? I am simply stating facts. I only had a cursory contact with a Beta (that I know of) - it was at the University of Oklahoma, 1975/6, the guy's name was "Mark", and he was a member of the fraternity's leadership (don't ask me for his title - I don't remember, perhaps never knew), anyway, the only reason I knew who he was, was because he was having sex with a guy that I knew (an Italian-American law school student, who has since been dis-barred). Look, I'm not saying that this guy was typical of Beta's (I'm quite sure he was/is NOT). Anyway, you people seem to be hung up on my relationship with Beta Theta Pi - that guy is the only guy that I knew of that was a Beta, and the fact that he had a problem with his sexuality (he was a BIG MAN on campus with the sorority girls) is neither here nor there. I am quite liberal in those matters. Again, just stating the facts . . . . something you people apparently have a problem with.

Family Details[edit]

I'm not sure this line is necessary, appropriate, or sourced: "His youngest son attends Episcopal High School in Houston, Texas where he is said to be a bully and is often in disciplinary trouble." So, I removed it. Uncited character statements are not a good idea.Coleca 05:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Needs attention[edit]

This article has some temporal discrepancies and needs updating. I'm not qualified to make the changes as I don't know the background. --Rhombus 18:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

intro checked. personal life checked and expanded. career at enron written. (all as of 4-07-06). i'm not going to check the rest of the article. (anon )
everything else looks ok and reasonable. it would be more helpful to state the "temporal discrepancies" so that others can check them. (anon_ )

Took out this paragraph, cause I couldn't find a citation for it anywhere. If you find a cite, please add it back in.

"Skilling had a breakdown on the streets of New York City in April 2004. After an evening of excessive drinking he began to harass people on the street and began to accuse total strangers of being part of the FBI. Police responding to the 911 calls found him uncooperative and concluded that he was an "emotionally disturbed person" in need of emergency assistance." Thanks. Jahenderson 18:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

put back in (cited) by (anon )

Under the FBP he is scheduled for release on 2/21/2019.


This article has been mentioned by a media organization:


I'm not sure about the "fair use"ness of the frontline quotes. Also, they may be inciting PoV in here now. Do they exist online anywhere (Like a PBS site?) that we can link to instead? Thanx 22:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The supposed talk with Jack Grubman on the conference call where Skilling called someone an "asshole" is not correct, I'm pretty sure. I am almost positive he actually called a hedge fund manager who was shorting the stock an "asshole" on the call. This is in the book The Smartest Guys in the Room, about the Enron scandal. The fund manager was the head of Highfields Capital Management, I believe. I don't have the book with me (though I read it recently) so I cannot give you a specific page number, but it's in there, if someone has the time to look.

The hedge fund manager's name was Richard Grubman. The confusion with Jack Grubman, who also became notorious around the same time, is understandable but they're two different assholes, so to speak. I just looked it up in Brian Cruver's book, Anatomy of Greed, at p. 53-54. --Christofurio 15:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandal from 80.41.*.*[edit]

Note that the author who anonymously edits from IPs beginning with 80.41.*.* is a serial vandalizer and is utterly non-credible. More info. I have reverted his edits. Nova SS 04:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Rumor has it that he will soon die of a "heart attack" as well.[edit]

I removed the sentence above since it seems as vandalism. No sources, just speculation. Mr.K. 23:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Ya think? :) The best info might be whatever his brother Tom might have to say, as Tom's predictions are usually good. :) Wahkeenah 04:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Why did the judge direct that Skilling go to Butner prison?[edit]

The article doesn't explain why. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 05:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

Children's ages[edit]

"Skilling has a 22-year-old daughter, a 20-year-old son, and a 16-year-old son". Unless, through the wonders of Wiki these ages are dynamically updated on each child's birthday, it would be better to indicate, e.g., "(b. 1985)". I am unable to find the birth dates (or, in fact, the names) of Skilling's children. The info seems to come from a 23 Oct 06 Associated Press article. No changes made by this FNG. Suggestions? Renirambus 22:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

In an encyclopedia article, a report of what someone supposedly said is not "hearsay"[edit]

An anonymous user deleted a sourced, linked quotation attributed to Jeff Skilling, in which Skilling allegedly referred to himself -- in a somewhat colorful way -- as being "smart." The material was deleted by the anonymous user with the explanation that it was "hearsay."

I restored the quote.

The questions of (1) whether the material is a direct quote or just a paraphrase, (2) whether Mr. Skilling actually said it, and (3) whether Mr. Skilling is really smart or not, might of course be interesting questions. However, a report (accurate or otherwise) in an encyclopedia article that a particular person said a particular thing is not "hearsay."

Hearsay is a highly technical legal term describing certain kinds of evidence. Certain kinds of hearsay are admissible as evidence in court, and other kinds are not.

This material was (and is) sourced with a link to the page on the internet where the quotation is found. Perhaps the quotation in question might be objectionable, for purposes of Wikipedia, on some ground or another -- but (I would argue) the anonymous user has not yet provided one. Yours, Famspear 22:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


Someone (maybe Jeff himself) is constantly changing Jeff Skilling's occupation from prisoner to businessman. Following the Wikipedia a businessman is: "A businessperson is a generic term for someone who is employed at a, usually, profit-oriented enterprise, or more specifically, someone who is involved in the management (at any level) of a company." A Prisoner on the other hand is: "A person incarcerated in a prison or jail or similar facility." Well Jeff Skilling is in a prison and except from the possibility of him hustling in the joint (about what we don't know) he is not empolyed at a profit-oriented enterprise or involved in management of any kind! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Skilling enron.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Skilling enron.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Prepare Yourself for Skilling's Exoneration[edit]

I predict that Skilling will be largely exonerated.

The government's case smelled like a hatchet job when it was prosecuted, motivated by political ideologies that demand white businessman villains, and it smells worse now that certain crucial judicial niceties seems to have been conveniently ignored. The sentence of 24 years was outrageous. The liberal press joined in, like Fortune magazine (an anti-capitalist organ dolorously reporting on capitalism), and even Harvard Business School with unseemly haste raised its skirts and beat a hasty retreat from its former star graduate.

Some of the contributers to this article and its commentators shared in that mob mentality. If Skilling is in fact exonerated, will their attitude change? Will they have learned anything? Did the leftists who demanded the blood of the Duke lacrosse players learn anything? Will the huge costs of Sarbanes Oxley imposed on American business in the wake of Enron be lifted?

Nah. They'll just pack their tents and "move on" to the next target. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I've just stopped by here, but I would like to note for this contributor that Wikipedia talk pages are not a forum for the topics of their articles - they are for discussion related to improving the article only. Thank you. Vicenarian (T · C) 15:38, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The Exoneration Train Picks Up Speed[edit]

Consistent with my comment above, the Fed's case against Skilling is now unraveling. After rejecting the theory that Skilling's actions were motivated by bribery (e.g., that he committed fraud by failing to provide "honest services"), the Supremes look likely to throw out next many or all of his remaining convictions based on finding facts supporting the argument that the hometown jury was biased ("in-house judging").

These developments tend to highlight the generally snarky anti-Skilling attitude displayed in this article, along with its many implicit presumptions of his guilt and selective reliance on unverified reportage (e.g., that of Fortune and its left-wing book-writing staff). So much for neutral POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

"e.g., that of Fortune and its left-wing book-writing staff", and you are supposed to be NPOV? If you want to discredit a source, you need to do better than cry liberal bias. You need to prove that what they're claiming is factually inaccurate. Atheuz (talk) 22:32, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Dear Atheuz, It was not me who asserted that Sklling said to a Harvard Business School interviewer "I'm fucking smart." That assertion was never "proved to be factually accurate", yet it still remains in this Wiki bio. It was simply stated without attribution by the two Fortune Magazine reporters who wrote the book "Smartest Guys in the Room." Want proof of this? Read the book. I have no obligation to prove their unsupported allegation either true or false. They -- and by attribution -- Wiki do. Who's POV'ing who here?

2009 vacatur of sentence[edit]

The section is confusing. It makes no sense to me, and cites this link, which doesn't seem to have content. (maybe my browser) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Son found dead[edit]

Not sure how to use this in the article, but read this. Seems to confirm son's death. Someone else can edit the article at will. YellowAries2010 (talk) 22:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Jeffrey Skilling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:46, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Jeffrey Skilling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:01, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jeffrey Skilling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC)