On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 13 of 20:
Next »
« Previous
Could be nothing more than weird tax laws
Or perhaps they wanted to restate the earnings back when they were unprofitable anyway rather than screw up their current profitability.
Posted by: Michael Kelly   Posted on: 07/13/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Uh oh....  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/13/04
Which I'm sure...  Michael Kelly | 07/13/04
All depends how much they were "fudging".  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/13/04
Usually  Michael Kelly | 07/13/04
Normally I would agree, but...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/13/04
Good call on your part  bidemytime | 07/13/04
I am not the brightest investor but,,,  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/13/04
With all the financial scandals around...  bidemytime | 07/13/04
I hear ya.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/13/04
This should be interesting ... (NT)  P. Douglas | 07/13/04
I don't see anything here. (NT)  P. Douglas | 07/14/04
Why restate earnings?  Rodney Davis | 07/13/04
Could be nothing more than weird tax laws  Michael Kelly | 07/13/04
When the CFO heads for the hills, it's a real red flag.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 07/13/04
lol  V Sanders | 07/13/04
If a red flag  IT_User | 07/13/04
Red Hat restates earnings  Loverock Davidson | 07/13/04
State of panic?  IT_User | 07/14/04
hmm, wierd math  V Sanders | 07/13/04
The true motivation behind the ``Look  michael-t | 07/13/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

Meet Doc