So I guess the ads haven't started yet - must be n
Post# of 40991
(Total Views: 320)
Posted On: 05/17/2019 10:15:25 AM
So I guess the ads haven't started yet - must be next week - huh.
I wish Steve would just stop tweeting on timing and just PR and surprise the world when something ACTUALLY takes place - LIKE AN AD.
Talk about foot in mouth disease.
BTW - never thought I would say this but toodles is right about the fins. He didn't accuse him of faking or the revs not being real but even if he uses GAAP principles, it is easy to classify something incorrectly or book a revenue incorrectly or expense something that could be depreciated - it doesn't mean he meant to deceive - it just wasn't 100% per an audit. I don't think toodles was being accusatory, just that audited fins would give us a more accurate picture of the state of affairs.
Example is sending inventory to a dealer and taking it as revenue and receivable - when in fact it is just another inventory location and revenue recognized when it is drawn out and sold. The terms dictate how to book it, which we have no knowledge of - so we don't know if there is an issue with proper revenue recognition until an audit occurs to flush that stuff out. Again not necessarily being deceitful - just not knowing how to appropriately account for all of the different contract terms. JMHO.
Audits cost money and at some point I guess he will do it, but based on what he is trying to do, it is not on the hot list - unfortunately it is a back burner item.
I wish Steve would just stop tweeting on timing and just PR and surprise the world when something ACTUALLY takes place - LIKE AN AD.
Talk about foot in mouth disease.
BTW - never thought I would say this but toodles is right about the fins. He didn't accuse him of faking or the revs not being real but even if he uses GAAP principles, it is easy to classify something incorrectly or book a revenue incorrectly or expense something that could be depreciated - it doesn't mean he meant to deceive - it just wasn't 100% per an audit. I don't think toodles was being accusatory, just that audited fins would give us a more accurate picture of the state of affairs.
Example is sending inventory to a dealer and taking it as revenue and receivable - when in fact it is just another inventory location and revenue recognized when it is drawn out and sold. The terms dictate how to book it, which we have no knowledge of - so we don't know if there is an issue with proper revenue recognition until an audit occurs to flush that stuff out. Again not necessarily being deceitful - just not knowing how to appropriately account for all of the different contract terms. JMHO.
Audits cost money and at some point I guess he will do it, but based on what he is trying to do, it is not on the hot list - unfortunately it is a back burner item.
(2)
(0)