1. Side Pockets: A way to move toxic holdings "Off Balance Sheet," to a netherland, hidden from investors and perhaps regulators. That would be Casey's corporation, Hammar Investments as well as his recently-revealed contract with his "publisher." Designed to be used in pretty much the same way as Enron's secret partnerships.
2. "Mark to Market." Enron's concept of marking to market involved making up a laughable future value for each of their projects, then counting as income today the expected future value. As the expected future value changed (always upwards) they would "mark" the value to the fictitious "market" and count the difference as income. In a now-infamous Enron internal spoof video, Jeff Skilling jokingly refered to their new "hypothetical future-value accounting" which would allow them to claim even more fictitious income. Casey does much the same, sinking himself deeper and deeper into debt, while claiming that itsallgood because of the huge future income that his current out-of-control borrowing and spending is going to make possible.
3. Crimping Copious Consumer Lending. No question how this one hit Casey. This one also was a major cause of Enron's downfall. With people cutting back on spending, and with margin requirements being upped, Enron's ability to generate income and it's ability to sell more and more stock were both curtailed at the same time. This was the beginning of the end for Enron.
4. Crimping Copious Corporate Liquidity. For Enron this made life even harder. It got tougher and tougher to sell those bizarre side-deals into an increasingly critical credit market. It got tougher to borrow and spend. Even Casey's little corp and his various backers and supporters are getting hit by this problem today.

Barry further notes:

Remember, this is all courtesy of lots of Fed induced liquidity, and a willingness of lenders to provide lots of cash to high risk borrowers at low rates with easy terms.

As true for Casey Serin today as it was for Enron back then.

Looking at Casey individually, I see lots of additional parallels with Enron CEO Jeff Skilling.

• Both were, at their core, geeks who imagined themselves as something more. Ther's nothing wrong with being a geek. Just look at Bill Gates. But when geeks decide they need to be something else, disaster is waiting in the wings.
• Both are extremely vain, particularly with regards to their geeky appearance. Skilling got Lasik and cosmetic surgery, inspiring many of the other Enron geeks to do the same. Casey goes for the natural beeswax in his hair, the purported benefits of his semi-vegan lifestyle, etc.
• Both seem to want to compensate for their geekiness with a variety of adventurous activities. The Enron "guys" trips that Skilling led have become legendary for their testosterone-laden activities and exotic locales. Casey obviously coudn't match these, so he contents himself with flipping on a trampoline, disappearing to Lake Tahoe, and running off the swing on vines and bounce around with kangaroos in Australia.
• Both claimed not to be "details guys." Skilling, of course, had an obligation to know the details, whether he wanted to or not. Likewise, Casey had a legal obligation to know what was in the various pieces of paper he signed. His claims to non-knowledge are likely to be as well-accepted as Skilling's were.
• The "hypothetical future value accounting" they both are inclined to use is reflective of their "idea guy" view of themselves. To both of them, merely having a potentially great idea is worthy of immediate reward. Working out the details -- or even figuring out if the idea is truly valuable -- is someone else's problem. Thus Enron counted huge "revenues" from incomplete and unviable power plants in India (among other dubious schemes), while Casey considers himself an "investor" based on the fact that he has sunk money into useless "investments" which he feels will ultimately pay off, if only as "learning experiences." Same attitude, same problem.
• Both believe that they truly are The Smartest Guys in the Room. In Skilling's case, there is ample evidence that he was a pretty sharp guy, though obviously his opinion of his judgements was inflated. Casey's intelligence is in question, but his opinion of himself is not. He clearly believes that he has access to opportunities and ideas that "normal" people do not.
• Both, ultimately, seem not to care who or how many people they hurt along the way.

-btc