oh good. forfeited assets are routinely used to compensate victims of financial fraud, at least when it is DOJ. we can hope SEC will do the same. but on the other hand, if they were going to, i would think they would have specifically said something about the forfeiture being allocated for restitution or restoration. perhaps they did and it just did not appear in the summary.
i wonder if people who were stockholders during the fraud but are not stockholders now would get compensated. that would seem most appropriate, but also difficult to execute.
if the stockholders are seen as the victims, then management and everyone else who had shares might get restitution in proportion to their holdings. would the unissued authorized shares allow the company itself to receive compensation for those unissued shares? would it be different if they had issued shares and held them in reserve?
my mind begins to boggle. perhaps the company will get some money. my guess is that will take more than a year if it is going to happen.
regardless of the statement on forfeiture and what it means as far as the collection of the 2.2 million debt, there is absolutely no way GDGI is going to ever have to pay the levys 2.2 million dollars for services that included criminal fraud.
maybe part of that was for legitimate work setting up the company with the SEC that the levys could argue stands apart from their fraud, but i dont see them succeeding in collecting a cent of that money while they are broke and in jail.
as i said before, whether or not it is off the balance sheet, the next time the company has enough money to PR, they can mention that, whatever the technical aspects of how it works out, their lawyer can tell them with a high degree of certainty they are off the hook
which we have all known here for a while, but a PR to announce the debt is effectively dropping from 3 mill to .8 mill might sway some newcomers
when that money an PR comes, there will be other good news of some kind to go with the debt relief