Apparently it was only in the print version.
Here is a summary from the NFI board on Investor Village (which retains the old Yahoo layout):
"The article was basically unsubstantiated reports by unnamed sources that authorities were "looking into" FFH's treatment of a transaction that they got an opinion letter on from the IRS. Here is my email comment on it to a friend right after it came out:
"Wow. So "sources" tell Roddy that prosecutors are expected to do stuff months from now. Who are the sources? Dunno. Are their expectations based entirely on their desire for their short positions to benefit from those expectations being broadcast by the NY press? Dunno.
The IRS never gives out copies of its letters to companies - he should know that. No doubt he does. This is just another use of the word "offshore" to smear a legit transaction, and use terms like "looking into" versus "filing charges" - hey, I hear the SEC is "looking into" my identity. Of course, they haven't actually bothered to phone or email me. But you know, "sources" tell me they are "interested"...
The game is so transparent." "
This post # 2049 by EasterBunny
Gee would it not be funny if this is a case where a hedgie had an advance warning of a negative article. Greenberg is not what one would call a meticulous reporter he would not bother to check if article was actually published just take hedgies word at face value.
Its the New York Post, for God's sake.
According to a survey conducted by Pace University in 2004, the New York Post was rated the least credible major news outlet in New York, and the only news outlet to receive more responses calling it "not credible" than credible (44% not credible to 39% credible).