That was the purpose?
Well, I want you to look at Exhibit 1g.
So what you said is not exactly accurate on that day. Is that correct?
They did not get the detailed positions regularly.
You think the average person listening to this would not think you were referring to the trades that were at issue that ...
So you were very comfortable with the position you were in under those three central scenarios, showing you losing money...
Therefore, do not say things like that in writing.
And I would hope that the guidance that you and other folks would give would be against tweaking, but being whatever is ...
Prior to that time, had you received regular information about the SCP portfolio?
And that a $660 million error is material.
Does it pose special risk because there is no tangible asset or revenue stream to stop losses?
That kind of tone I am afraid went to the top.
Is this because there is not enough people at the OCC to read these reports? How does it happen?
If you had known that, or if you had known that, Mr. Waterhouse, would that have affected you?
Well, if its purpose is to do exactly what I said, would that trouble you?
[A]ll those positions are fully transparent to the regulators.
Did the OCC know any about that, what I have just described?
What happened here is factually clear, and they acknowledge what happened here.
