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.
I sent you what the news was coming down the pike on messanger.
When DD talks people should listen!!
i told you big news coming!!!!
Not what i am referring to. Stay tuned!!
News coming down the pike!!
more importantly how many posts were correct?......not many......
a trial is still an agreement with terms conditions and expectations....a verbal handshake agreement is still an agreement and binding.....we are discussing revenue recognition which you so magnificently proved my point for me ....if you want to debate another topic we can indulge you....
it is a good thing SHMP never hired the accounting firm you worked for as their auditors....
There are 2 principles of revenue recognition under accrual accounting. First, an agreement which goods or services are to be delivered pursuant to typically a written agreement. Second, a reasonable certainty that payment will be made.
obviously an agreement has been entered into with expectation of collection, i dont think SHMP just sends out shipments without any hope of collection or derivative revenue..... hence the recognition of revenue and offsetting accounts receivable...if mgmt determines that the such revenue is not collectable it is directly written off to bad debt expense or set up as an allowance for doubtful accounts....
For example, if SHMP contracts with a distributor to purchase $250,000 in shrimp at x per pound for a 5 year period, SHMP would not recognize $5 million in revenues even if that agreement was with Whole Foods under the reasonable assurance principle of revenue recognition.
DUH, the principle of revenue recognition is to recognize the revenue in the period it is earned the $5 million isnt eared all at once therefore not recognized in one year....in your example SHMP would only recognize revenue for shrimp delivered but not necessarily paid for in the fiscal ear ended (not calendar year ended as fiscal year end can be different, just for clarification) hence the accounts receivable thingy....the 5 year contract you use as an example would be a note to the F/S....
That is why one goes to school for 4 years to become a CPA and it's a multi part test to be licensed as a CPA.
totally agree which i have completed and qualified in 1996 and obviously you did not
Existing GAAP requires that, to be recognized, revenue should be earned and should be realized or
realizable. SEC guidance expands upon this concept by providing four criteria for revenue recognition as follows:
(a) Persuasive evidence of arrangement exists
(b) Delivery has occurred or services have been rendered
(c) The seller’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable
(d) Collectibility is reasonably assured
Again i agree and you are making my point for me so no need to argue this any further.....google, copy and paste is a wonderful thing....
this accounting firm you worked for where they hired to do audits by Martha Stewart, Conrad Black, Bernie Madoff or Leona Helmsley????
Never too late to go back to school.....
Sort of not correct at all....SHMP records all transactions in accordance with "GAAP" that is the accrual basis of accounting, recognizing the revenue when the transaction is entered....what you are referring to "I would hope they record a sale when they receive the consideration" is the cash base of accounting and is not recognized at all......please read the notes to the F/S for further clarification....basic accounting 101....
;
finally.....
Where’s the new material ……yawn
I thought you were getting some new material….same bs same bs….yawn
Really? Thank you for the heads up, your posts are so insightful albeit the same old song and dance. Maybe change up the disinformation to keep your posts fresh….
EBITDA is not the same as net income, ya i think you should take the mercy rule because it is painful explaining simple things to you....do you even know what the case is about and what the damages are and who is trying to collect and who is trying to negate the claim??????
as stated in my post, taxes.....your point is?????
Once again you have missed the point….btw EBIITDA. Is not net it is earnings BEFORE interest taxes depreciation and amortized….the financial term you should be referring to is NET INCOME….the big hint would be the word NET in the term….perhaps when you register for law classes pick up an accounting class as well….scrambled, poached or omelette???…You missed a spot…..
did anyone say tax free????.... once again i just used numbers as an example in reply to EQ post.....try to follow the thread...i will try to type slowly so you do not get lost....
at 192M gdsi will net about 50M....
As we say in the law, you can’t inform on something that is already known. You can’t find the post where I dispute the 43% because there is none. Your % of correctness really starting to slide down now. Scrambled, poached or sunny side up????
Please provide the post where I dispute the 43%….I merely stated they have been paid in full for work done to date…..
Sure sparky sure….including you disputing the fact that Gdsi has hired Brazilian lawyers and a collection agency but other then those two little facts you have been 100% correct..,, oh I almost forgot the brilliant defence that couldn’t be posted in case rontants lawyers see it….how did that work out….scrambled poached or over easy???
I think I have copied and paste the relevant section of the pr…. If you know different please post with evidence something you are lacking in…your armchair legal bs does not suffice..,.when you get your law degree then we may take you seriously until then you are just a wannabe….poached scrambled or over easy
Yawn….armchair no legal degree lawyering….take it with a grain of salt….anyone that disputes a press release has no credibility….,just saying
Pm your email I’ll give you updates
If one only reads the press release they would know
Global has also formally engaged Mattos Filoh, one of the premier legal firms in Brazil, to assist with the court filings and final paperwork in Brazil to finalize the internationally recognized judgement…..poached scrambled easy over or sunny side up….
Should we share your brilliant defence now that rontan’s lawyers have filed their briefs…..it is safe to let the cat out of the bag….in these dark times I am sure the board could use a laugh…
No info to give yet..,,JT it isn’t the lawyers that get 27% it is the funders, the lawyers have been paid for work done to date….
I strongly disagree that is a big lie, you know what I mean….
Their lawyer has said they will not be asking for another extension…..we will know tomorrow if that is true or not….
Ok sparky it you say so….as wrong as it is you are entitled to your opinion I prefer facts however….
Absurd not even close to the truth
i like post #49067 better, which i quote for reference...
surely nobody is idiotic enough to believe that the supreme court is going to hear this case.....that is funniest thing i have heard on ihub....eddie i think they were yanking your chain and you took the bait....
Nope in response to post #97370….but it ok prob too busy wiping egg off his face and must have been distracted….talking about Gdsi great press release by bill notice how the law firm is busy doing filing and final paperwork, also collection agency with significant presence in Brazil and WORLDWIDE….almost like I wrote that release weeks ago right EQ, or more commonly know as “low IQ”…LMFAO
Once again you are wrong
I wonder who has the last laugh…..can’t wait for BSF Xmas party!!!…once again those that know what time s going on and those that don’t…..
At least Gdsi lawyers are doing something not like rontan’s lawyer who apparently spends his days scouring internet boards looking for the brilliant defence……I posted one such defence suggested by someone who’s friend is a lawyer and is a partner in a major law firm, wink wink but I think all it did was give rontan’s lawyer a good laugh….can’t wait for the next brilliant defence from the dynamic duo….LMFAO
Mattos Filho, a premier law firm located where you say…. Oh Brazil you say….. 20 lawyers working on what you say….. oh working on a case Gdsi has in Brazil… golly gee I wonder what they are doing because apparently nothing can be done until the appeal process is done LMFAO….some people may need to get a napkin to wipe the egg of their face….. there are those that know what is going on and then those that think they know what’s going on…..this has to be a capital GEEZ LOUISE, SMH and a really really big LMFAO….
i copy and paste post #48872 for your reference, notice the word prelim highlighted....you are correct words make a difference.....
who said the Brazilian court has acted.....read the post only states hat the lawyers are doing work on the recog and enforcement, ie prelim work....read subsequent post #48867 which i quote for your reference.....geez louise, smh, lmfao.....