An article in Barron's noted the following. Okay. Last fall, someone with a long memory and an even longer arm reached into that bureau drawer and came out witha moldy cheese sandwich and the equally moldy notion of corporate forecasts. We tried to find out what happened to the cheese sandwichbut, ratsl, even recourse to the Freedom of Information Act didn't help. However, the forecast proposal was dusted off, polished up and found quite serviceable. The SEC, indeed, lost no time in running it up the old flagpole-but no one was very eager to salute. Even after some of the more objectionable features-compulsory corrections and detailed explanations of why the estimates went awrywere peeled off the original proposal. Seemingly, despite the Commission's smiles and sweet talk, those craven corporations were still afraid that an honest mistake would lead them down the primrose path to consent decrees and class action suits. To lay to rest such qualms, the Commission last week approved a "Safe Harbor" rule that, providing the forecasts were made on areasonable basis and in good faith, protected corporations from litigation should the projections prove wide of the mark (as only about 99% are apt to do), What is the purpose of the "safe harbor" rufe? Why are corporations concerned about presenting profit forecasts