The ruling party of A P should be the main culprit. They might have used the Satyam as a front company or a tool to enrich themselves. Now tjhey speea like holy cows. Keep the ivestigation on confidentially and keep all press and media away for at least one month and then publish the outcome. It is advisable to keep the entire AP investigation teams away as they may not bringout the real facts. A fraud of such magnitude could not have been perpetrated by one single individua or for only few days. Several big whigs might hae been involved and the same must have been going on for at least 2 or 3 years. They should also bring out how the Raju became gullible or a tool in the hands of perpetrators of this fraud.
Re: Satyam Fraud
by mahabodhi on Jan 11, 2009 07:46 PM Permalink
Raju was blue eyed boy of Chandra /Babu Naidu and L K Advani!and he was introduced to american Presidents Clinton by none other than Naidu when he was CM !Naidu ensured that all rich land in /hyderabad and IT projects of AP Govt. were givento Satyam!and ask yourself as many have said in this forum was Naidu holding shares of Satyam!But there amny who support terroism financial Terroism like you and even many authros like SriRajeev Srinivasan in this Rediff forum! what u r saying is that u too belong to Raju band and that corrupt who defamed Mothe rIndia and brought disgraced to IT Industry is innocent!Well what ever u may say but Satyam listed in NYSE your Raju will face the american law as enron directors got!MD did suicide whcih this Terroist Financial Terroist will not do and CEO is in prison for 24 years!so let us hope that truth will prevail and at least americans will give justice to your Raju and ilk!
Re: Re: Satyam Fraud
by shermon Kumar on Jan 11, 2009 07:51 PM Permalink
Why can't you get your language right? Difficult to follow what you are saying
Re: Re: Satyam Fraud
by Kaushik Das on Jan 11, 2009 08:01 PM Permalink
1. This is not financial terrorism. 2. Satyam, like any big company in India (reliance or sahara or sheila dikshit's son's malls and blueline buses or any other) is close to the powers, be it Naidu or the present CM Reddy. That is the practice in India. It may not be wrong unless undue advantage is taken from the relationship.
3. Rajeev Srinivasan's article had simply pointed out that Satyam is not a one-off case (as many other people have concurred). He had also given the justification on the basis that the father's and son's company are dealing with each other. Using common understanding, this is nothing special. However, since satyam was a board-ruled company, things change a bit. Rajeev S had clearly stated that he was not an expert in this matter and the article was his own opinion. And he was partly right because the same WB that is now bent on barring Satyam had not barred the several companies that have taken the world economy down with their subprime foolishness.
