* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Enron Episode - Buy, buy, buy In 2000, 14 of the 16 analysts who followed Enron were recommending it as at least a "buy." And Enron stock hit an all-time high. By last October, with the company on the verge of a meltdown, 18 analysts were following the company, and each was still recommending it, 14 of them calling it a "strong buy." Analysts were listening to Enron's glowing forecasts instead of doing their homework. Analysts have become management stenographers! How could it possibly happen? Insiders say analysts often have a herd mentality. If a stock is on the move, and everyone else is recommending it, it isn't easy to buck the trend. But in the case of Enron, there may have been more to it than that. Enron was always making deals, buying smaller companies to help it expand. Every deal needs an investment banker. And almost every analyst's firm had an investment-banking division that stood to make millions of dollars in fees. Analyst John Olson, who issued a "strong buy" recommendation on Enron on Sept. 28, less than three weeks before Enron began to implode, says analysts were under pressure to be positive. "It was unspoken, unwritten, but there was a strong presumption on the part of the investment banks that if they were ever going to do any business with Enron, the analyst had to have a 'strong buy' recommendation on the stock," says Olson, of Sanders Morris Harris. Securities lawyer Jacob Zamansky blames the analysts. "Analysts, according to industry standards, are supposed to be objective, unbiased in doing their research," Zamansky says. "They've done a great disservice to the public." Even today, with the company mired in bankruptcy and scandal and its shares de-listed from the New York Stock Exchange, six analysts suggest investors hold onto the stock. Two even call the stock a "buy." Only three analysts are recommending investors sell the stock.