InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 5
Posts 570
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/21/2008

Re: janice shell post# 59765

Tuesday, 07/11/2017 6:53:12 PM

Tuesday, July 11, 2017 6:53:12 PM

Post# of 64475

...but we never make any representations that we have income or cash...

Seriously? I believe they've already done that. More than once.



I reviewed every PR from April 27 to now and I don't see any claims of income or cash. I did in fact point out several weeks ago in one of my posts that the company claimed in the quarterly and annual reports an investment worth about $48MM and that the "income" was classified under "Other income" and further that it was labeled as "unrealized income." It ends up at the bottom line under "Net income" and I am not an accountant and I don't know if it is supposed to be carried over to that line, but they appear to be specifying the fluctuation of the investment as unrealized income (whether a gain or a loss). Even if it was a gain they had an item in there which was for taxes with a note specifying the taxes are "deferred" presumably because an unrealized gain has no tax liability yet. I'm not 100% convinced there is any wrongdoing regarding this cash or income aspect of the PGPM story. Without an accountant to actually comment on this matter, I have to delay my final view on this. Whether the assets actually exist is another story and the onus is still on them to prove it.

The $3MM commitment also may not be a claim of cash. I looked up the definition of capital commitment and it just means "access to capital" upon request and doesn't seem to be cash in hand. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_commitment
This does not mean they didn't possibly bungle the filing of the Form D. I don't know enough about it to make a determination on that, either. Maybe they shouldn't have filed it at all? My one thought on that, however, was that it was definitely intended to be some kind of convertible security and my concern was that, given A/S = O/S, a promise of potential stock from a convertible would be invalid due to the unavailability of authorized shares. I still keep open the possibility that these are well intentioned, but out-of-their-league players in the public markets. Minor league players trying to make it in the majors and just screwing up tons of plays on the field. If they are in that category, it still represents a significant investment risk to be sure. It does seem like the story is not over yet...