InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Toxic Avenger

08/01/11 9:26 PM

#125762 RE: loanranger #125759

One of the other possibilities is that the media credits were worth $10 million, but only to someone who could use them. They were after all radio and print advertising credits. A B2B business, as I believe JBI was and is, would not have a lot of use for them.

Most likely the media credits were valued at some notion of "equivalent value" and the $10 million was a gross overstatement, but unless the company (media 4 equity, I believe) was itself a complete fraud, they shouldn't have been worth 0 to someone who could use them.

But I agree with you that most CEOs would realize that if "it looks to good to be true", it's because it is.
icon url

Johnik

08/02/11 7:22 AM

#125788 RE: loanranger #125759

The valuation of the media credits, for what it's worth, appears to have come from the seller (you probably already know that Domark sold the media credits to JBI in connection with the Javaco deal). You can check Domark's financials, and you will see the credits valued at $10 Million. I'm not defending the valuation of them on JBI's books, nor the appropriateness of the method used to account for the transfer, but there is a basis for the value used (albeit incorrect, and perhaps even grossly negligent). Further, the terms of the transaction were disclosed to the investing public and the balance sheet clearly identified the item valued as "media credits" rather than some vaguely defined asset (e.g., intangibles). The company also dismissed their auditor from that time, their CFO from that time has resigned, and the company took a number of steps to both correct the error(s) and prevent further errors moving forward. Does that dismiss the error as irrelevant? Of course not, but I do not believe the company was engaging in fraudulent activity because I do not believe the company acted with an intent to defraud anyone. That is a point that I'm sure we will just have to agree to disagree on, at least for now, but there is nothing wrong with disagreement.


My post yesterday: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=65736997

You response today: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=65765726

My responsive post today: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=65769098