Tech,
The problem I have with your opinion is that it is based on a wholesale acceptance of the allegations in the SEC complaint, coupled with a wholesale rejection of JBI's answer to the complaint. Neither the complaint nor the answer constitute evidence, so apparently you have taken a biased adoption of one side's non-evidentiary submission, for whatever reason. By way of example, you disregard assertions such as this:
"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."
and instead adopt the SEC allegation that the consultant advised to the contrary, with no evidentiary support whatsoever.
Your attempt to bolster the fraud allegations with reference to aspirations for the company's development is nonsensical. All corporations want to grow and increase the value of the company's stock for the benefit of its shareholders.
You further state that it "cannot be argued" that the accounting of the media credits was "in violation of SEC accounting rules." What are these "SEC accounting rules" you speak of? Provide a cite, because I do not think they exist.
So I guess if we make up the law, and make conclusions of fact based on one side's allegations, which lack evidentiary support and are disputed, you are correct.
Again, no one I know invested in this company for the media credits. Did you?
