InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 209
Posts 32167
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 06/30/2009

Re: Johnik post# 125456

Monday, 08/01/2011 4:44:55 PM

Monday, August 01, 2011 4:44:55 PM

Post# of 312016
The cases against Altris, the relevant cases, went forward until settlement. It's true that Altris filed a motion to dismiss. It is also true that they subsequently settled. And it's obviously true that they, and/or their insurers, didn't expect their motion to dismiss to succeed or they wouldn't have agreed to a settlement prior to a ruling by the court.

To return to the case at hand:
"Returning to the five bullet points:
(1) overvalued media credits = accounting irregularity (and related to bullet point two)
(2) improper accounting for acquisitions = accounting irregularity
(3) "as such" (which I interpreting to mean "as a result of bullet points one and two") the financial statements were not in accord with GAAP = effect of accounting irregularities
(4) lack of internal and financial controls = possible cause of accounting irregularities
(5) as a result of points 1-4, the financial statements were misleading = effect of accounting irregularities"

I was an accountant in a corporate environment for a good piece of my working life and never heard the phrase "accounting irregularity". Thank goodness. Frankly I don't believe that it is a term that gets a lot of use. However:
"American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“AICPA”) Statement on Auditing Standards (“SAS”) No. 53, The Auditor’s Responsibility to Detect and Report Errors and Irregularities, and AICPA SAS No. 82, Consideration of Fraud in a Financial StatementAudit, both define an “accounting irregularity” as:
“[I]ntentional misstatements or omissions of amounts or disclosures in financial statements. Irregularities include fraudulent financial reporting undertaken to render financial statements misleading ….”
http://10b5.pwc.com/PDF/RESTATEMENT_RESTATEMENT.PDF

We are now in general agreement on both the law and the facts.
I, too, believe that items 1,2,3 and 5 represent intentional misstatements or omissions of amounts or disclosures in financial statements and fraudulent financial reporting undertaken to render financial statements misleading. Item 4 may have contributed to same, but it is a separate and distinct allegation.


Your summary of the bullet points is fine, but I like to keep the original wording from the complaint handy:
"Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (1) that the media credits acquired by the Company in connection with the acquisition of JavaCo were substantially overvalued; (2) that the Company was improperly accounting for acquisitions; (3) that, as such, the Company’s financial results were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”); (4) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (5) that, as a result of the above, the Company's financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times."



I'm tryin ta think but nuttin happens......Curly