Just out of curiosity I keep reading people using the word fraud to describe the disclosures of BTDG. If I recall fraud had a precise legal definition that requires various elements to be met including intent and benefit from the action. Until this latest filing unless I am missing something there doesn't seem to be proof of intent, nor that the CEO nor the company benefitted from the press releases.
I ask the question as it seems over and over this word is used.
Up until the recent filing, it seemed simply that the CEO and in particular the CFO did not have the experience or judgement to prepare proper financial statements, prepare proper discslosure documents, nor in regards to new business opportunties the ability to evaluate and close deals- let alone any common sense about what the word "material" means. Reading the filings give the impression of a terribly confused individual but one trying very hard to prepare filings but with a limited knowledge of legal,securities and business matters. Is this an alternative explanation that the documentary evidence supports ?
Someone with a financial background could perhaps understand the quarter by quarter changes in the financial statements, and the lack of accruals pointed out for salary expenses etc seems rather odd. Maybe the 6 employees are only a few hours per week or donating there time. Hard to see with $4,000 revenue for a quarter what they are doing. This wouldn't be the first time a Pink Sheet company wasn't on top of their financials.The fact the CFO can't distinguish between what shares actually issued and outstanding and the corresponding press releases is of course rather interesting. Did BTDG pay any rent expense in 2010 ?
Of course any CEO with common sense would address the 1.5 million ounce gold issue, and if he was fooled, then at least disclose it doesn't exist.
The troublesome aspect of this filing is that the press releases indicate a fair amount of shares issued to the officers of the company, and recently formed entities.Plus it appears CEO has told some shareholders according to postings on this board he is not a seller and is a buyer of the shares. So why isnt CEO and CFO listed as as key shareholders ?
Please let us be fair. Maybe the CEO and his HIP HOP deal will be future of the company. If CEO not up to proper disclosure and can't oversee the CFO maybe the company would be better served by firing the CFO ! Maybe everything is always the fault of someone else as it appears to be implied, but it is job of CEO to manage the overall picture and the last 6 months don't exactly engender confidence. If the CEO concentrated on what he does best and matches with the HIP HOP potential a bookeeper or legal secretary maybe he could make this work.
If CFO can't accrue for expenses, how can BTDG operate so many multiple businesses , without capital, and ineffective marketing ?
And what news of "definitive merger " ? So many questions, so few answers. I hope the CEO will dump the CFO, address head-on the gold and sin-can issues, get a secretary/bookeeper, and focus on the HIP HOP business.
And come on for those who are complaining the loudest did you really buy shares of this sub-penny stock expecting the press releases to relay events BTDG could achieve ? Maybe you have proof of the bad intent you ascribe to this company, maybe you are correct- but also incompetent management of BTDG is another explanation as well. Isn't that possible ?
Can someone with financial background look at the quarterly financials and let us know if they make sense ?
