Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Where did the idea of M&K being the one that prepared the financials come from? Jim Porter, nominee for Micro-cap Ethical CEO of the Year would not have that done.
That is why I am happy M&K is performing the audit. As now we will hive confirmation from a certified source of what is going on. Bayport management must be pretty comfortable with opening their books to this CPA firm.
Really? How much equity was used for that purchase?
I like the volume I see.
What percentage of the float does he have already?
Are you suggesting that when an auditor sees a item on a financial statement, that is presented to them for verification, they should not get a second confirmation on its validity?
It appears that someone was reading into what I was saying. I am neither of the two things you mention....although I do know Jim.
In answer to one of your questions...YES it was that auditor.
As to the information requested....it had nothing to do with the reserve question. At that time I was not even aware of the requirement for reserve reports, as my financial expertise does not take me into Oil and Gas Corporations.
Am auditor asking questions to confirm facts is not an auditor with concerns. We should have concerns if they did not confirm information.
I guess I KNOW IT ALL !!!!! LOL
BAYPORT ROCKS
That is a valid speculation....but based upon what? I don't remember a PR, or even a rumor, on that subject.
Where is is said in a PR that it was delayed? My best guess was that we should see it the next 10 workdays. Did anyone hear anything else?
If the audit could be done that easily, it would have already be published. That is also the reason that I think there is more than we know here. That would be a positive thing for shareholders.
One would need to go back and read my previous posts. I believe I said that I had an NDA with Bayport...that was signed well over a year and a half ago. The auditor contacted me to confirm some detail associated with my involvement. I surmised from that exchange that if they were checking on what they asked me, that the audit was well into the final stage. This 10 day statement was just my opinion from all the above.
I have no formal information from the company. As I have said, when I talked to the auditor, I surmised from the questions asked, the status of the audit.
Maybe my post was not clear...the auditor contacted me to confirm a particular transaction after it had occurred. The NDA was null and void after that point because the information was made public. I made a point about not trading (either buy or sell) during the period of time the information was not public. I am unsure of any other way to say this.
And not trying to add 'confusion' according to what I have read, an audit is not an audit until it is complete.....So, as I said before, we will most probably be able to refer to the audit in about 10 work days when it is complete and published.
At least I understand the position taken, so when the audit appears there will be no further reason for discussion.
Is it possible that they asked the CPA firm to get it done, because as you point out there is probably not much to be done for the reserve reports. And yes, not sure where the extra bucks are coming from for that added expense. Maybe that is part of the unaccounted for shares. Again....just a shot in the dark. I think that is the reason that this is a pink sheet stock, with much to be made or lost based on the speculative gamble. Knowing what I think I know, I am not selling at this point.
I can see why one could come to that conclusion. I might have done that also, if I had not known James Porter as I do.
As to the new point you add to the conversation, is it possible that they are waiting for the audit to be completed before more business information is offered?
Again, just thinking outside the box....but an NDA is usually for a specific point in time, and the information given to the NDA person is only meant to be secure until the data is made public. It is also possible that the CPA asked to speak to that individual in order to be sure that certain conditions were met....to assist in completing the audit. Like a loan being repaid, or shares being issued, or something of a contractual or financial nature. Just a thought. Does anyone else have other ideas on this subject?
Just a shot in the dark here, but maybe the professional fees paid last year....when the audit was contracted....covered most if not all the cost of the audit. Just thinking outside the box here.
The point I was making was that the casino and used car business had nothing to do with Bayport management. This has moved to a different conversation right now that I was not on.
You and I agree that an audit is not complete until it is published. However, I was responding to this..
I know this to be wrong...I was almost questioning my own terminology, so I checked with the dictionary definition.
audit
noun au·dit \'o?-d?t\
: a complete and careful examination of the financial records of a business or person.
So I guess a CPA could be working on 'a complete and careful examination of the financial records.....'
I believe that to be inaccurate, as the old EXTO, after Shatts took over, decreased the number of AS by about 2/3. Before her, the company was in different hands. The reverse merger happened after Shatts, and well before it formally changed its name to Bayport International. The facts are clear if one reads them.
Funny, but you seem to leave Diana Shatts(?) out of the mix. I agree, that when she took the ownership....just prior to the RM....it was fine. But go back to the old EXTO company and you will find smoke and mirrors. That is when the casino and auto sales were the joke. Current management is trying like hell to turn the company round.
The clock is ticking here. Since I have personally talked to the CPA, I know it has been actively worked on, and was close to completion at that time. They just needed to get the reserve reports completed. Maybe, and I am not sure, wanted to include 1st Q in the process.
Maybe we are the ones that are correct. This is the time that will tell it all.
We should see the price per share start moving up big time next week.
Ready for the CPA audit within 10 days....that will include the reserve reports contracted for by the CPA.
What does that have to do with the point we were on? Bayport, nor its management, was not involved in many of the things mentioned. Please let me see any PR from them regarding the used car sales, or the casino.
That is wrong again.....unless you are saying that Bayport or even Jim Porter was involved with a casino, or used car sales (maybe he sold his own)> If that is what is being said, I would love to see some PR from Bayport, or Jim Porter that talks about it.
Most of the subjects you mention were from the shell corporation that Bayport reversed merged with. That company was called EXIT ONLY, and had let Bayport RM with them.
I think it was shorted, but I also think there was some covering yesterday.
Looks good to me, and I do not want to be left behind.
I wonder what will be said when the audit shows up?
That is far from what I am saying...not suggesting....The audited financials give an accurate reading of facts.
Looks like some are clamoring for the .0039s.
That is what i said.....those are the smart speculators. They KNOW that when there are audited financials they have something to rely on.