You would be somewhat correct if all these were arm's length transactions, namely the purchase of Greenpay.
The guy suing everyone has some interesting information in the suit, such as bank accts & dates etc pertaining to the purchase of Greenpay. No one here probably has any way to verify it, but if the guy isn't making stuff up, this shows that Ed really runs all of these businesses. That means all these companies are actually related parties (AKA all the same company in the eyes of the law/GAAP) and should be audited as one, which they never have been.
All this seems a little too shady for me. I think Ed has a little something something going on in the background.
Point #2 - if the suing guy is correct about the transfer of shares to ED being accounted for incorrectly.... that's a HUGE hit to the fins. I wasn't around back then, so I don't know what the share price was on date of transfer, but accounting for them at par value is just silly. There should obviously be an expense in the amount of total # shares X share price, which is a lot of millions. Retained earnings should be a huge negative.
You see what you want to see though.
My last of 5 comments for the day. Have fun without me.
