InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 12
Posts 1040
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/22/2009

Re: payperview post# 25042

Thursday, 04/18/2013 4:48:10 PM

Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:48:10 PM

Post# of 45244
Thanks, ppv.

Interesting reading, a couple of early comments:

- Legal/Compliance. If this is to reflect finally paying the baristas, seems like it should be part of personnel.

And, most of personnel, in turn, should be part of COGS, as I think you have pointed out before.

But, that would highlight that senior management is not being paid in cash, which of course further understates expenses.

- Shares. Increased by 34M in 2013, or more than 15%. A number of these shares were as payment for such things as "Professioinal (sic)" services and ice cream distribution funding.

But, the shares are put on the books at .001, together with the expense, which seems to me very misleading since the receivers could reasonably expect to sell them at .05/share (or whatever the average was during the period, likely higher).

Also, some appeared to be for settlement of an acquisition dispute; again, if put on the books at full value, this would imply a higher book value for the purchased equipment, thus higher depreciation expense, which the shareholders would logically want as it would mean lower taxes at some point.

- Audit. For a company allegedly pursuing NASDAQ listing, not just a cheaply acquired NASDAQ symbol, surprising that they would not take advantage of the opportunity to have the financials audited.

Unless you believe there is no intent for attempted listing before next year at the earliest. Which I believe, since the company does not financially qualify -- and the results of an audit might be distasteful.