EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

08.26.08

Financial Fraud Claimed at Microsoft; Microsoft Paid Microsoft Witness to Shut Up

Posted in Finance, Fraud, Microsoft at 6:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The following old article is hugely damaging and we are fortunate to have found a copy of it in the Web Archive. It vanished from the Seattle Weekly.

This article, which is titled “Microfraud?”, provides a testimony from a Microsoft insider who claims financial fraud. Interestingly enough (but not so surprisingly), Microsoft paid him a fortune to go away, keep quiet, and for the terms of the settlement not to be disclosed (recall Iowa and Caldera for similar examples).

Here are the opening paragraphs from this article.

THE ALLEGATIONS WERE shocking: For years, Microsoft has systematically distorted its profit figures in an effort to consistently beat Wall Street expectations and keep its stock price steadily rising. The false reports would violate SEC regulations, and amount to outright fraud.

More shocking was the source of the allegations: Microsoft’s chief of internal audits, Charlie Pancerzewski, who reported directly to the company’s chief financial officer.

Most shocking of all was what happened to Pancerzewski when he reported the suspicious bookkeeping to his supervisors, Microsoft CFO Mike Brown and chief operating officer Bob Herbold, in the spring of 1995. Soon afterward, Pancerzewski—who for nearly five years had received stellar performance evaluations—received his first-ever unsatisfactory one, and was eventually forced to resign.

Two months ago, Microsoft quietly settled a lawsuit containing these allegations, filed in 1997 by Pancerzewski under the Whistleblowers Protection Act. The auditor claimed he was wrongfully terminated after telling his supervisors that Microsoft might be breaking securities and tax laws. The lawsuit made its tortuous way through several rounds of pretrial motions until last fall, when US District Judge Carolyn Dimmick denied Microsoft’s final plea for summary judgment, finding credible evidence that Microsoft may have violated SEC rules, as Pancerzewski alleged. Shortly thereafter, Microsoft and Pancerzewski settled out of court. Terms of the agreement were sealed, but one source who claims familiarity with the case says that Microsoft paid Pancerzewski $4 million.

Microsoft is claimed to have lost $18 billion in 1998. That is another article that magically vanished, but we managed to find a copy.

More recently, one financial manager from Microsoft was prosecuted for embezzlement [1, 2, 3]. If the legal system is functional, more Microsoft employees might need to be put in prison and it goes all the way to the top (managers). One of them ended up jailed about a month ago. There are other examples, such as Robert Bach, a Microsoft chief who was accused of inside-trading [1, 2]. There was never a trail, but there sure was evidece.

Novell, for that matter, is no saint, either. Novell too is said to be cooking its books, but the SEC does not see it.

There is a lot of investigation to do on this, and we shall continue to do it. Please post any corrections you may have so that we don’t make improper accusations.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

4 Comments

  1. julian67 said,

    August 26, 2008 at 9:49 pm

    Gravatar

    The page referenced hasn’t vanished at all.

    It’s available at http://www.seattleweekly.com/1999-01-06/news/microfraud.php and dates from 1999. I accessed it without difficulty.

    It relates that most of the allegations were proven unfounded “Judge Dimmick threw out most of Pancerzewski’s allegations (including the European tax issue and a separate age discrimination claim) for lack of evidence, but left it for the trial to determine the truth of his charge that Microsoft fraudulently “borrowed” from its cash reserves in relatively lean reporting periods and hoarded cash in the reserves during fatter times, in order to give a more orderly appearance to its earning pattern.”

    No report of any resulting adjudication is made.

  2. Cypress said,

    August 26, 2008 at 11:44 pm

    Gravatar

    Excellent article. It’s nice to see that people don’t forget and that not everything can be buried and forgotten. :)

  3. Sander Marechal said,

    August 27, 2008 at 1:52 am

    Gravatar

    Roy, please do what Eric S. Raymond did.

    Make a copy of those relevant articles. Then publish the article here *in full* but with enough of your own comments mixed in that it falls entirely under fair use. See the Halloween FAQ at http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/faq.html point “Would you please make un-annotated versions available?”.

    If external articles are important then it’s worth making copies. It keeps the information from disappearing from under our feet.

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    August 27, 2008 at 11:46 am

    Gravatar

    Update: in USENET, Rex Ballard has posted the following response:


    Message-ID: <d7e98c92-d352-4e27-a4f9-179712da3ad3@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>
    From: Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com>
    Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
    Subject: Re: [Old] Microsoft is a Financial Fraud (Like Enron), Says Top Microsofter!
    Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:29:48 -0700 (PDT)

    > Microfraud?
    > ,—-[ Quote ]
    > | THE ALLEGATIONS WERE shocking: For years, Microsoft has systematically
    > | distorted its profit figures in an effort to consistently beat Wall Street
    > | expectations and keep its stock price steadily rising. The false reports
    > | would violate SEC regulations, and amount to outright fraud.

    This wasn’t such a big surprise, but the Clinton Administration wasn’t
    interested in investigating securities fraud that publicly. They
    understood that even the RUMOR of an SEC investigation could trigger
    panic around that stock, then that industry, and finally the entire
    market.

    The Bush administration put Harvey Pitt in charge of the SEC, and
    Harvey wanted to make a name for himself by initiating a bunch of very
    public investigations of former Bush supporters who didn’t come
    through for George W Bush when needed. The offenses were often less
    than 1% but the public investigation triggered panic selling that
    crashed 98% of the value of the stock, with WorldCom investors left
    with nothing, over a 1% irregularity.

    But the Bush Administration had zero interest in prosecuting
    Microsoft, who had made a number of political contributions, AND a
    number of contributions to charities suggested by Carl Rove and Jack
    Abramhov. Microsoft could have inflated it’s numbers by 25% but Bush
    wasn’t even going to enforce the actual judgement against Microsoft
    that they already had. Microsoft’s executives admitted under oath, in
    depositions, and in email divulged during discovery that they
    routinely engaged in fraud, extortion, blackmail, sabotage, and
    obstruction of justice, but the Bush Administration felt “Companies
    should have a right to profit from their innovations”. McCain has
    made an identical statement – I wonder how much Microsoft gave to the
    “streight talk express” and it’s puppet charities, and whether McCain
    is aware of how owned he is.

    Even though there have been something like 9,000 complaints against
    Microsoft and specific anticompetitive business practices, the DOJ has
    packed the “Technical committee” with Micrososft friendly members, so
    they don’t see anything wrong. And the DOJ itself tries to overrule
    several other states and say “There’s not a problem”.

    > | More shocking was the source of the allegations: Microsoft’s chief of
    > | internal audits, Charlie Pancerzewski, who reported directly to the company’s
    > | chief financial officer.

    And he reported the irregularities back in 1997, when nobody cared.

    > | Most shocking of all was what happened to Pancerzewski when he reported the
    > | suspicious bookkeeping to his supervisors, Microsoft CFO Mike Brown and chief
    > | operating officer Bob Herbold, in the spring of 1995. Soon afterward,
    > | Pancerzewski—who for nearly five years had received stellar performance
    > | evaluations—received his first-ever unsatisfactory one, and was eventually
    > | forced to resign.

    Yep. Microsoft was probably the leader in that corporate disease that
    made examples of a few
    “trouble-makers” who “weren’t team players” and “didn’t have the
    company religion”. It’s a good
    way to keep the others who know about the “little problem” from
    getting any “dangerous ideas”.

    > | Two months ago, Microsoft quietly settled a lawsuit containing these
    > | allegations, filed in 1997 by Pancerzewski under the Whistleblowers
    > | Protection Act. The auditor claimed he was wrongfully terminated after
    > | telling his supervisors that Microsoft might be breaking securities and tax
    > | laws. The lawsuit made its tortuous way through several rounds of pretrial
    > | motions until last fall, when US District Judge Carolyn Dimmick denied
    > | Microsoft’s final plea for summary judgment, finding credible evidence that
    > | Microsoft may have violated SEC rules, as Pancerzewski alleged. Shortly
    > | thereafter, Microsoft and Pancerzewski settled out of court. Terms of the
    > | agreement were sealed, but one source who claims familiarity with the case
    > | says that Microsoft paid Pancerzewski $4 million.

    Typical Microsoft tactic. Try to get a preliminary judgement, and if
    the judge gives
    you a clearly unfavorable ruling suggests further investigation, they
    bury the case
    by offering a settlement, having the records sealed, and barring the
    other party from
    testifying against Microsoft.

    > http://web.archive.org/web/20070308032343rn_2/www.seattleweekly.com/1

    > Why was this article removed last year? Why was the man paid 4 million to keep
    > is mouth shut? This is hugely damaging! It’s a smoking gun.

    > Another thing to point to when people ask: “why is Microsoft a criminal
    > organisation?”
    >
    > Recent:

    > Ex-Microsoft Manager Sentenced for Fraud
    > http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MzM3NjYsLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=
    >
    > Ex-Microsoft Manager Pleads Guilty, Sentenced For Embezzlement
    > http://www.crn.com/software/209400603

    Notice how quickly the federal prosecutors went after the ex manager
    who was defrauding Microsoft. In the plea-bargain, she got 22 months,
    and just under $1 million in settlements.
    The 22 months may have helped her get into “club fed” and the actual
    amount might have been $1 million minus her own legal fees.

    > Ex-Microsoft manager ordered to prison
    > http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2008/07/19/Ex-Microsoft_manager_orde
    >
    > Ex-Microsoft manager jailed for $1m fraud
    > http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2222135/microsoft-manager-jailed-1m
    >
    > Ex-Microsoft Manager Gets 22 Months for Fraud
    > http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/148642/exmicrosoft_mana
    >
    > Ex-Microsoft boss sentenced
    > http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/371393_msftcourt19.html
    >
    > Former Microsoft Manager Gets 2 Years In Jail
    > http://news.portalit.net/fullnews_former-microsoft-manager-gets-2-yea

    > Kirkland woman senteced to 22 months, ordered to repay nearly $1 million, for
    > embezzlement scheme
    > http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/news/25634819.html

    Wow, mess with Microsoft and your punishment will make LOTS of papers
    - message, don’t mess with Microsoft, they will mess you up.

What Else is New


  1. Team Battistelli Intensifies the Attack on the Boards of Appeal Again

    The lawless state of the EPO, where the rule of law is basically reducible to Battistelli's ego and insecurities, is again demonstrated with an escalation and perhaps another fake 'trial' in the making (after guilt repeatedly fails to be established)



  2. After the EPO Paid the Financial Times to Produce Propaganda the Newspaper Continues to Produce UPC Puff Pieces, Just Ahead of EU Council Meeting

    How the media, including the Financial Times, has been used (and even paid!) by the EPO in exchange for self-serving (to the EPO) messages and articles



  3. Beware the Patent Law Firms Insinuating That Software Patents Are Back Because of McRO

    By repeatedly claiming (and then generalising) that CAFC accepted a software patent the patent microcosm (meta-industry) hopes to convince us that we should continue to pursue software patents in the US, i.e. pay them a lot more money for something of little/no value



  4. The US Supreme Court Might Soon Tighten Patent Scope in the United States Even Further, the USPTO Produces Patent Maximalism Propaganda

    A struggle brewing between the patent 'industry' (profiting from irrational saturation) and the highest US court, as well as the Government Accountability Office (GAO)



  5. Patent Trolling a Growing Problem in East Asia (Software Patents Also), Whereas in the US the Problem Goes Away Along With Software Patents

    A look at two contrasting stories, one in Asia where patent litigation and hype are on the rise (same in Europe due to the EPO) and another in the US where a lot of patents face growing uncertainty and a high invalidation rate



  6. The EPO's Continued Push for Software Patents, Marginalisation of Appeals (Reassessment), and Deviation From the EPC

    A roundup of new developments at the EPO, where things further exacerbate and patent quality continues its downward spiral



  7. The Battistelli Effect: “We Will be Gradually Forced to File Our Patent Applications Outside the EPO in the Interests of Our Clients”

    While the EPO dusts off old files and grants in haste without quality control (won't be sustainable for more than a couple more years) the applicants are moving away as trust in the EPO erodes rapidly and profoundly



  8. Links 27/9/2016: Lenovo Layoffs, OPNFV Third Software Release

    Links for the day



  9. The Moral Depravity of the European Patent Office Under Battistelli

    The European Patent Office (EPO) comes under heavy criticism from its very own employees, who also seem to recognise that lobbying for the UPC is a very bad idea which discredits the European Patent Organisation



  10. Links 26/9/2016: Linux 4.8 RC8, SuperTux 0.5

    Links for the day



  11. What Insiders Are Saying About the Sad State of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Anonymous claims made by people who are intimately familiar with the European Patent Office (from the inside) shed light on how bad things have become



  12. The EPO Does Not Want Skilled (and 'Expensive') Staff, Layoffs a Growing Concern

    A somewhat pessimistic look (albeit increasingly realistic look) at the European Patent Office, where unions are under fire for raising legitimate concerns about the direction taken by the management since a largely French team was put in charge



  13. Patents Roundup: Accenture Software Patents, Patent Troll Against Apple, Willful Infringements, and Apple Against a Software Patent

    A quick look at various new articles of interest (about software patents) and what can be deduced from them, especially now that software patents are the primary barrier to Free/Libre Open Source software adoption



  14. Software Patents Propped Up by Patent Law Firms That Are Lying, Further Assisted by Rogue Elements Like David Kappos and Randall Rader (Revolving Doors)

    The sheer dishonesty of the patent microcosm (seeking to bring back software patents by misleading the public) and those who are helping this microcosm change the system from the inside, owing to intimate connections from their dubious days inside government



  15. Links 25/9/2016: Linux 4.7.5, 4.4.22; LXQt 0.11

    Links for the day



  16. Patent Quality and Patent Scope the Unspeakable Taboo at the EPO, as Both Are Guillotined by Benoît Battistelli for the Sake of Money

    The gradual destruction of the European Patent Office (EPO), which was once unanimously regarded as the world's best, by a neo-liberal autocrat from France, Benoît Battistelli



  17. Bristows LLP's Hatred/Disdain of UK/EU Democracy Demonstrated; Says “Not Only Will the Pressure for UK Ratification of the UPC Agreement Continue, But a Decision is Wanted Within Weeks.”

    Without even consulting the British public or the European public (both of whom would be severely harmed by the UPC), the flag bearers of the UPC continue to bamboozle and then pressure politicians, public servants and nontechnical representatives



  18. Released Late on a Friday, EPO Social 'Study' (Battistelli-Commissioned Propaganda) Attempts to Blame Staff for Everything

    The longstanding propaganda campaign (framing staff as happy or framing unhappy staff as a disgruntled minority) is out and the timing of the release is suspicious to say the least



  19. Links 23/9/2016: Latest Microsoft and Lenovo Spin (Now in ‘Damage Control’ Mode)

    Links for the day



  20. White Male-Dominated EPO Management Sinks to New Lows, Again

    Benoît Battistelli continues to make the EPO look like Europe's biggest laughing stock by attempting to tackle issues with corny photo ops rather than real change (like SUEPO recognition, diverse hiring, improved patent quality, and cessation of sheer abuses)



  21. Journalism 102: Do Not Become Like 'Managing IP' or IAM 'Magazine' (the Megaphones of the EPO’s Management)

    Another look at convergence between media and the EPO, which is spending virtually millions of Euros literally buying the media and ensuring that the EPO's abuses are scarcely covered (if ever mentioned at all)



  22. Journalism 101: Do Not Believe Anything That Benoît Battistelli and the EPO's Management Say (Also Don't Fall for the UPC Hype)

    A survey/review (or an overview) of recent articles about the EPO and why they're wrong (mostly because they parrot the official lies from Battistelli's department)



  23. Patent Law Firms, David Kappos, and IAM 'Magazine' Still Shelter Software Patents by Cherry-Picking and Lobbying

    Amid the gradual collapse of software patents in the United States there are disingenuous efforts to bring them back or maintain a perception that these patents are still potent



  24. Microsoft-Connected Patent Trolls Going Places and Suing Microsoft Rivals, Microsoft Wants More 'Linux Patent Tax'

    Microsoft-connected patent trolls like Larry Horn's MobileMedia are still attacking Microsoft rivals and Microsoft wants more money from Korea, after it attacked Linux with software patents over there (notably Samsung and LG)



  25. Links 22/9/2016: Linux Professional Institute Redesign, Red Hat Upgraded

    Links for the day



  26. Links 22/9/2016: Red Hat's Latest Results, GNOME 3.22 Released

    Links for the day



  27. The Patent Law Firms in the US Relentlessly Lobby for Software Patents Resurgence by Placing Emphasis Only on Rare Outcomes

    Decisions against software patents continue to be ignored or intentionally overlooked by patent law firms, which instead saturate the media with the few cases where courts unexpectedly rule in favour of software patents



  28. Links 21/9/2016: Lenovo Helps Microsoft Block GNU/Linux Installations

    Links for the day



  29. Like Big Tobacco Lobbyists, Benoît Battistelli and Team UPC Are Just Chronically Lying and Manipulating Politicians With Their Lies

    Benoît Battistelli and Team UPC continue to meddle in politics and mislead the public (through the press) about patent quality as well the UPC, which is now in effect sunk inside the ashtray of history



  30. The EPO's 'Investigative' Function is Totally Out of Control and Continues to Get Bigger, Whitewashed by So-called 'Review'

    An update on the situation which still causes great unrest at the European Patent Office (EPO), namely abuse of staff by the so-called Investigative Unit (Eponia's equivalent of unaccountable secret services)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts