| From: Rawnoc | 4/5/2012 4:39:56 PM | | | of 550 | | | DAVID LETTERMAN'S TOP TEN REASONS THE SEC CASE IS TOAST:
(quotes from JBII's response -- my comments in red)
(1) Domark’s CEO and “the consultant” stated that the SEC commented on the media credits on Domark’s or Sports Quest’s SEC filings and the valuation of $10 million, which was ultimately cleared with the SEC. <~~~untlimately cleared with the SEC?
(2) Further to the referenced Skype message, the message is quoted out of context and the consultant testified under oath that “[Bordynuik] did not ask me to plug numbers, inflate the balance sheet in any way.” <~~~testified under oath defending Bordynuik and this was the star witness against him?
(3) Domark assigned the referenced media credits to JBI and that in making such assignment, Domark’s CEO represented that such credits were worth $9,997,134 in print and radio ads. <~~~media credit seller blessed them?
(4) JBI booked the media credits using the same methods and reasons used by the SEC reporting company, Domark. <~~~remember, the SEC blessed the media credit valuation for Domark and JBII merely copied that
(5) JBI did not rely upon the media credits as “selling points” in either capital raising effort. 
(6) After review of the media credits valuation through October 2009 and forward, the business consultant ultimately agreed with the recording of the face value of the media credits at $9.997 million. <~~a 4th party now agreed with the valuation
(7) Defendants have developed and fabricated a 1 gallon, a 1 ton and two large scale processors that currently operate at a plant in Niagara Falls, NY. <~~currently operating making and selling P2O fuel
(8) Defendant Bordynuik also met with a CPA auditor colleague of Gately, who reviewed the form 10-Q in person. <~~yet another who blessed the media credit valuation
(9) JBI paid fees to Gately & Associates that may have been used to pay for the principal’s criminal representation, but state that such fees were already due and owing for professional service. <~~so much for the claim of lack of independence
(10) Defendant Bordynuik believed that a different individual who was a PCAOB, CPA auditor colleague of the principal of Gately & Associates performed audit procedures on behalf of that firm while the principal was himself unavailable to perform such procedures and the majority of the transactions within JBI (being its subsidiary Pak-It and Javaco) were reviewed and audited by Withum Smith, & Brown <~~looks like the audit was done after all |
| | JBII - JBI, Inc. | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read |
|
