Why isn’t the Qwest case moving fast enough? Light Reading makes a strong argument about this in a recent piece which addmitedly is as skimpy on details as the Business Week article, but still it quite a nice precis of the whole thing. Perhaps time to point to new links on the latest developments in the case of Qwest.
bq. Boulder-based marketing firm Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy found that a Kansas City, Mo., jury would bring less bias to the case, testified Paul Talmey, who heads the firm. Media scrutiny of Denver-based Qwest’s financial and legal problems has been intense in Colorado, Talmey said. News reports of the firm’s accounting restatements and stock slide and the millions made by top executives have been so pervasive that 71 percent of the people surveyed had heard about the case, he said.
bq. Federal regulators are investigating the business relationship between Qwest and Avici Systems – a vendor that Qwest founder Philip Anschutz invested in through one of his companies. Avici, a Massachusetts provider of Internet routers, is the third Qwest supplier to disclose that it is part of a broad investigation; Redback Networks and Tellium Inc. are the others.
But the most interesting bits are buried at the very end of the story.
bq. An Anschutz investment entity made $3 million selling Avici shares and retained a 1.2 percent stake in the company, an Anschutz representative said earlier this year. Of 33 Anschutz-backed companies, 12 eventually counted Qwest as a customer, received investments from Qwest or its affiliates or had Qwest test their products. Anschutz officials said then that all SEC rules and disclosure requirements were followed, and conflicts of interest were carefully avoided.