Wrapping
Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Wrapping

  1. #1
    MrExcel MVP
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Millbank, London, UK
    Posts
    1,790
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

     
    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. #2
    MrExcel MVP Aladin Akyurek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    The Hague, NL
    Posts
    81,772
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nothing unexpected, I'd say.

    Aladin


  3. #3
    MrExcel MVP
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Millbank, London, UK
    Posts
    1,790
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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. #4
    MrExcel MVP Aladin Akyurek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    The Hague, NL
    Posts
    81,772
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

    Aladin

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

  5. #5
    Board Regular Barry Katcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Dog Beach, Florida. Yeaahh!
    Posts
    4,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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. #6
    MrExcel MVP
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Millbank, London, UK
    Posts
    1,790
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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. #7
    Board Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    50
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    OMG, now THAT was funny Barry!!!

  8. #8
    MrExcel MVP Aladin Akyurek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    The Hague, NL
    Posts
    81,772
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    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?

    Aladin

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

  9. #9
    MrExcel MVP
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Millbank, London, UK
    Posts
    1,790
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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. #10
    MrExcel MVP
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Michigan USA
    Posts
    11,454
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

      

    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

Like this thread? Share it with others

Like this thread? Share it with others

Posting Permissions

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

 

 
DMCA.com