Thanks:  0
Likes:  0

1. hmmmm.... not sure if this can be exploited or not (in terms of extra columns and rows)

but, if you create a named formula in B1, say :

=a1*1.125

when you copy it to a1, the formula becomes

=iv1*1.125

it wraps it round to column IV....

ditto columns.... it wraps the formula to row 65,536

..... potentially useful ?

Chris

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Davison on 2002-03-29 05:44 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Davison on 2002-03-29 05:45 ]

2. Nothing unexpected, I'd say.

3. thanks Aladin, do you mean the 'wrapping' characteristics are not unexpected or that the potential exploitations of this characteristic may not be unexpected ?

(When I saw it, I couldn't think of any function that wrapped like this, being that they all returned #REF! errors when simulated)

Chris

4. do you mean the 'wrapping' characteristics are not unexpected

Yes.

I don't know whether this characteristic has a useful application?

When I saw it, I couldn't think of any function that wrapped like this, being that they all returned #REF! errors when simulated

Admittedly, left and down in the context of the named formula "addtax" is more general and, it seems to me, logical. You've got a point there.

[ This Message was edited by: Aladin Akyurek on 2002-03-29 07:37 ]

5. Great potential here! As a matter of fact, Enron used this to shift its losses from row 1 to row 65,536, knowing full well that Arthur Anderson was using an older version of Excel, and wouldn't be able to access row 65,536.

6. I don't know whether this characteristic has a useful application?
I'll admit, me neither, hence the "?" in the original open-question post !

7. OMG, now THAT was funny Barry!!!

8. On 2002-03-29 07:35, Barry Katcher wrote:
Great potential here! As a matter of fact, Enron used this to shift its losses from row 1 to row 65,536, knowing full well that Arthur Anderson was using an older version of Excel, and wouldn't be able to access row 65,536.
Darn it: Is this serious? Did he really use a named formula? Can you reveal more on this?

[ This Message was edited by: Aladin Akyurek on 2002-03-29 07:44 ]

9. On 2002-03-29 07:35, Barry Katcher wrote:
Great potential here! As a matter of fact, Enron used this to shift its losses from row 1 to row 65,536, knowing full well that Arthur Anderson was using an older version of Excel, and wouldn't be able to access row 65,536.
*chuckle* @ Barry

10. Great potential here! As a matter of fact, Enron used this to shift its losses from row 1 to row 65,536, knowing full well that Arthur Anderson was using an older version of Excel, and wouldn't be able to access row 65,536.

May be it is not time to get complacent -- who knows whether they were using an older version of Excel or a newer version of Excel, or utilizing an undocumented feature in any version of Excel that facilitates creative acounting by design or default. I am sure it is all in light heartedness -- we sure don't want to make light of other's troubles!

## User Tag List

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•