Tuesday, February 27, 2007 8:16:25 PM
Posted by: MrGoodBuddy
In reply to: scorpio70 who wrote msg# 250555 Date:2/27/2007 7:36:53 PM
Post #of 250588
I just think that is wrong though scorp.. He should have released those financials on time as promised. If there was a "problem" that he was aware of, he simply could have stated the issues and advised the public that they were going to be re-worked to accurately reflect the factual numbers.
He could have also, simply by using a calculator, gave some general guidance as to what the true figures should have been in the neighborhood of.
The "price raid" for which you speak of then would never have materialized.
Don't you think??
Nope.
His first goal was to get a retraction from the paper. Failing that his next goal was to seek guidance on sueing the b'jeesus outta the libelous characterization from Mr. Rennie.
He also knew that in his capacity as CEO that putting out numbers which while powerful were still nothing more than just their word against teams of professionals who would have ripped them to shreds, as they still weren't ready to file with the SEC.
While arguing points back and forth with counsel at his side the general conclusion reached was this is going to a waste of your time to do so. The criminal share raid that morning taking the price down from .09 to .01 in minutes sealed the deal. The argument now became one of timing and waiting for accuracy.
He's already stated that in house numbers were accurate. Pro forma numbers stated revenues incorrectly as they only should have included commission on contracts brokered.
Wanna go over their in house numbers that they stand behind?
Would you like to speculate on their botton line figures when their financials are brought to completion... now being inclusive through year end?
Or would you like to discuss the 'price raid' that you acknowledge did occur on the morning of the 16th, in forensic detail?
Your choice. Might be educational for you.
In reply to: scorpio70 who wrote msg# 250555 Date:2/27/2007 7:36:53 PM
Post #of 250588
I just think that is wrong though scorp.. He should have released those financials on time as promised. If there was a "problem" that he was aware of, he simply could have stated the issues and advised the public that they were going to be re-worked to accurately reflect the factual numbers.
He could have also, simply by using a calculator, gave some general guidance as to what the true figures should have been in the neighborhood of.
The "price raid" for which you speak of then would never have materialized.
Don't you think??
Nope.
His first goal was to get a retraction from the paper. Failing that his next goal was to seek guidance on sueing the b'jeesus outta the libelous characterization from Mr. Rennie.
He also knew that in his capacity as CEO that putting out numbers which while powerful were still nothing more than just their word against teams of professionals who would have ripped them to shreds, as they still weren't ready to file with the SEC.
While arguing points back and forth with counsel at his side the general conclusion reached was this is going to a waste of your time to do so. The criminal share raid that morning taking the price down from .09 to .01 in minutes sealed the deal. The argument now became one of timing and waiting for accuracy.
He's already stated that in house numbers were accurate. Pro forma numbers stated revenues incorrectly as they only should have included commission on contracts brokered.
Wanna go over their in house numbers that they stand behind?
Would you like to speculate on their botton line figures when their financials are brought to completion... now being inclusive through year end?
Or would you like to discuss the 'price raid' that you acknowledge did occur on the morning of the 16th, in forensic detail?
Your choice. Might be educational for you.
[Suppressed Sound Link]
[sound]gigarock.com/music/herecomesthesun.mp3[/sound ]
[sound]ladyo.net/Maria%20Muldaur%20-%20Midnight%2
