
Long before former WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers received 25 years in prison for accounting fraud, Phil White was “cooking the books” at Informix Software. As head of the database software company, White was driven by a mixture of greed and pressure – a lethal combination which serves as a cautionary tale for today’s technology executives.
In 1997, Phil White was the president, CEO, and chairman of Informix Software. But his importance went far beyond what these titles convey. He was the leader, visionary, guiding force, and patriarch of Informix. In one sense, Informix and Phil White were one and the same. Even though the company had tens of thousands of shareholders and thousands of employees, Informix was his company.
When White, a well-known hi-tech sales and marketing maven, joined Informix in 1989 the company was struggling. Over the course of the next eight years he engineered one of the most stunning success stories in Silicon Valley history; revenues grew ten-fold to a billion dollars, Informix’s stock was named top five year performer by the Wall Street Journal, and White was named Financial World Magazine CEO of the year twice.
Just as Phil engineered Informix’s success, his single-minded obsession with Oracle and his desire to upstage its founder and CEO, Larry Ellison, eventually drove the company to ruin. Informix shocked its investors in the spring of 1997 when it reported an unexpected first-quarter loss of $140 million. Revenues were half those of the preceding quarter. As a result, White, the man who once said, “I don’t think I have to fight Oracle,” resigned as president and CEO on July 22, 1997. He was dismissed from the board of directors a week later when accounting irregularities were brought to the board’s attention.
SEC Investigates
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) subsequently began an investigation and ultimately concluded that White signed financial statements knowing they were inaccurate. The SEC charged that White had inappropriately included revenue from contracts where side letters existed (secret agreements that enable customers to cancel contracts and receive their money back) and engaged in barter transactions with computer manufacturers where reciprocal purchases of hardware for software were made. At the SEC’s urging, the Department of Justice began a criminal investigation that would go on for years.
On November 18, 1997, Phil White’s successor at Informix, former 3Com executive Robert Finocchio Jr. made the “the mother of all financial announcements”: $311 million of revenues for the preceding three years had been overstated, and the company would restate revenues for 1994 through 1996.
Informix’s revenue restatement was by no means an isolated incident in the business world. The United States General Accounting Office reported that one of every ten publicly held companies restated their financial statements between 1997 and 2002 because of accounting irregularities that skewed financial results. As is usually the case, most of these restatements were lower than the original statements. In a total of 919 restatements, these companies lost an estimated $100 billion in market capitalization as a result.
Furthermore, the Informix restatement was nowhere near the biggest in the high-technology industry. The table below taken from United States Securities and Exchange Commission databases shows a few of the recent restatements.
| Restatement Years | Company | Amount ($M) |
|---|---|---|
| 2001~2002 | Worldcomm | $3,800 |
| 1995~2001 | Adelphia Communications | $2,300 |
| 2000~2001 | Qwest Communications | $2,200 |
| 2000~2001 | Computer Associates | $2,200 |
| 2000 | Lucent Technologies | $679 |
| 1999~2001 | Peregrine Systems | $509 |
| 1999~2002 | I2 Software | $359 |
| 1998~1999 | McKesson HBOC | $327 |
| 1994~1996 | Informix Software | $311 |
Widespread Impact
Revenue restatements are more than just accounting reversals. Their impact affects a company in every possible way. Customers are hesitant to purchase products, investors watch stock prices free-fall, employee morale is ruined (along with the value of employees’ stock options), and flurries of class-action lawsuits are filed by lawyers eager to capitalize on misfortune. It’s a devastating experience that almost always results in a management change and sometimes in bankruptcy. As I2’s CEO and chairman said about the company’s recent restatement, “Surely, the audit was no fun for us or our customers, and our customers were asked a lot of questions internally by their own people.”
If these restatements are “no fun,” then why are they commonplace today? John Coffee Jr., professor of law at Columbia University, offers the following reasons: “First, there is intensifying or weakening of a particular company’s stock, which usually occurs during a stock market bubble. Second, there is an overall decline in business morality and in the words of Federal Reserve Chairman an atmosphere of ‘Infectious greed.’ Third, the company has a weak board of directors who are not independent from senior management. Finally and most importantly, it’s gatekeeper failure--the failure of the auditors, securities analysts, and securities attorneys, who prepare, review or analyze disclosure documents.”
When a restatement occurs, almost everyone loses, and Informix’s auditor, Ernst and Young, was one of the biggest losers of Informix’s 1997 restatement. In one of the largest securities fraud settlements in the history of Silicon Valley, Ernst and Young paid the majority of the cash portion of the $142 million required to settle the dozens of class-action lawsuits filed against Informix in 1999.
Rationale for Restatement
While Professor Coffee would rightly argue that Informix’s downfall was the result of greed, cronyism among the board of directors, and a gatekeeper that wasn’t independent, there are four additional reasons for revenue restatements that are specific to the high-technology industry.
The Personal Cost
While customers, investors, and employees all lose during a restatement, some of the biggest losers are usually the individuals who were responsible for the error (whether a mistake or fraud) in the first place. These executives are forced to disgorge themselves of their proceeds from stock sales for the period in question, assessed penalties and fines, prevented from serving as company officers in the future, and sometimes sentenced to prison. Typical punishments handed out to high-technology executives involved in revenue manipulations are severe.
Against this background, what happened to Phil White is quite surprising.
Perhaps White’s attorney spoke a little too soon when he said, “When Mr. White is ultimately cleared, we hope the public and the media will ask why an innocent man was forced to answer these baseless charges.” On May 12, 2004, Phil White pled guilty to one count of false statements in a registration statement, a felony.
Legal documents show that White made $8,149,015 from the sale of Informix stock between February 7, 1995, and November 18, 1997. However, the sentence judge Charles R. Breyer, brother of Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, gave him was quite astonishing. White was sentenced to a $10,000 fine, a $100 special assessment, and sixty days in prison. It seems the world’s greatest salesman had closed the biggest and best deal of his life.
Informix as a company was the ultimate restatement loser, and the times that followed were not particularly kind to the company. Following White’s eight-year tenure, three CEOs would occupy the corner office in three years. After a less-than-successful merger with Ardent Software, the company was renamed “Ascential.” In the bitter end, Informix’s database assets were sold off to IBM in 2001 in what one analyst called “a fire sale, but nobody can find the fire.” As a database company, Informix no longer exists today. This is a sad statement about what was once a great company.
Steve W. Martin’s latest book is titled The Real Story of Informix Software and Phil White: Lessons in Business and Leadership for the Executive Team.
Risk Assessment
Our new checklist assesses the risk in your reporting processes. Start Now.
This Just In
Is a Subscription Accounting Model Right for You?
Most Popular
Best Practices in Revenue Reporting
SOP 97-2: Current Issues in VSOE Accounting
EITF 00-21: Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables
Webcasts
Live on August 26th Linkage of Contracts: U.S. GAAP versus IFRS
Sponsored by Softrax
Case Study
Automating Revenue Processes to Integrate Acquisitions
As a member you gain access to a host of valuable resources! Sign-up now, it's free!