Early 2000s, we get Enron, which tells us the books are dirty. And what is our repeated response? We just keep pulling the threads out of the regulatory fabric.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Before Enron, I think people were a bit more naive about the way things worked, and I think Enron pulled the curtain back on unsavoury practices that turned out to be a lot more widespread.
So much has changed in our business. E-books, that's been one of the principal developments. There has been also the failure of Borders and the rise of Amazon, just to name two others.
I think when companies are struggling, they don't want to talk to the press. The guys who write business books aren't interested in it because nobody wants to learn what it's like to be a mess, you want to learn how to be successful. That's slanted the whole thing quite a bit.
I agree that there are some bad apples on Wall Street. I spent about ten years exposing corporate and financial fraud for 'Barron's' magazine and I found a lot to write about.
Having a few companies controlling everything we read, see or hear is destroying our culture.
You know Texas is - even more now that Enron has bit the dust - it's held up on the back of small businesses.
The regulatory systems in place disincentive innovation. It's intense to fight the red tape.
In the case of Enron, we balance our positions all the time.
Buying only what you know can end in disaster. Just think about Enron's employees and business partners, the 'locals' who bought lots of its stock because they thought they were in the know.
I start every book with something that outrages me. I'm outraged by the FBI, the CIA, and computers that seem to have catalogued our lives. Power too often is accompanied by irresponsibility.
No opposing quotes found.