Has anyone spent any time going over the PR’s and the like from our fearless leader?
Has anyone spent any time going over the various blog entries?
I must have nothing better to do but I did it anyway. I actually did create a little list to see what items are common and what differ. I have even added a few thoughts.
See if you can add to this:
1. For at least four or maybe five years, Bergamo has described itself as a capital arranger and provider in the mid-market with international reach.
2. BGMO has repeatedly said that they prefer to invest in clean energy, water and other socially progressive businesses.
3. Even though the recently updated website and IR push tried to create a new image, it appears to be a repeat of what was previously provided to investors.
4. In every BGMO press release where some announcement was made regarding an acquisition, it was very clear that BGMO did not have at the time any money to invest in the proposed targets.
5. Within weeks prior to or after the announcement of an acquisition, BGMO issued a press release saying that a new third party entity would be providing BGMO the money to invest in the proposed targets.
6. It appears in each case, the third parties were not investing or loaning existing capital to BGMO but had to earn it or find it.
7. The third parties preferred method of earning money to push through BGMO to the target companies was through some form of high yield investment product although loans from a SBLC have been mentioned more than once.
8. All of the third parties were recently formed entities in the UK, the UAE, India and Singapore.
9. There is very little corporate history on these entities.
10. Some of the blog entries suggest that the source of the funds was not from these four countries but from other countries such as Japan, Pakistan and Switzerland.
11. Any time that the funding source did not deliver, BGMO has never issued a statement saying that the funding source had not closed and why it had not closed.
12. The only possible negative statement regarding funding came on the Big Biz show by Herzog and not through a formal PR was the issue of the Patriot Act on the money coming through the UAE entity in 2010.
13. Has anyone noticed that the amounts of capital being arranged for BGMO’s benefit are consistently getting larger?
14. As for the target companies, there was never a press release from BGMO saying the deals have closed or were abandoned.
15. The story on the coal project has gone silent.
16. The Solar project through a Canadian partner was fumbled through BGMO’s failure to provide capital. This project was announced dead by the Canadian partner but no comment was made by our fearless leader.
17. There was some comments regarding Bergamo Solar out of Florida but it is not clear if it was tied to the Canadian partner.
18. The GreenSafe investment is more confusing. It was never announced by either party that the deal was dead and we know it was connected to BGMO in early 2011. Even the Canadian Solar company was told that BGMO owned GreenSafe late in 2011 or perhaps into 2012.
19. As BGMO shareholders, the financial statements as prepared by L L Bradford do not tell us what businesses we control.
20. In every case, the PR’s suggest that BGMO would own 60% of the target company.
21. Bergamo ceased to be registered with the SEC about a decade ago due to the costs of an audit, the cost of annual filings, the holding of annual meetings and the reporting of material events.
22. Until earlier this year, BGMO ceased issuing financial statements with the rubber stamp saying subject to SEC Audit.
23. When I looked at the SEC website, they do not audit financials the way that a CPA does. They look at if the documents were filed on time and that they met the disclosure standards.
24. Since BGMO was not subject to SEC rules then why the rubber stamp note on the financials?
25. The new statements seem to be contested as to whether or not they are audited.
26. Many blog posters have looked at the statements and the notes and they are of the opinion that they were compiled which is not the same as an audit.
27. I had a licensed accountant look at them as well and they came to the same conclusion.
28. I was told that a CPA did contact L L Bradford a number of times to obtain some information on the related company transactions and Bradford never responded.
29. In going over some of the older statements, I found that the numbers at the end of one year adjusted for the operations in the following year never came to the new year end numbers.
30. If BGMO had the cash as they reported, the cost of an audit would have cleared up any confusion and sent the stock soaring instead it has fallen.
What I get from this list is not a warm fuzzy feeling but rather a nagging sense that I will chalk up another loss. I will hold onto my shares and hope that BGMO can pull it off or some new management comes in and makes a go of it.
