Hunter:
I know that this loan that I mentioned sounds an awful lot like the KLSE loan. But it is not.
From the FONX June,1996 10-Q:
At June 30, 1996 the Company had an unsecured note receivable in the amount of $1,160,000 which bears interest at 12% per annum and is due on demand. There was no accrued interest on the note receivable at June 30, 1996. A loan fee in the amount of $78,700 was received and recorded as interest income.
Subsequent to June 30, 1996 the Company increased this note receivable from $1,160,000 to $1,900,000 and obtained collateral security for the repayment thereof.
These are the KLSE loans that caused all the flap back then.
The $1.2M loan that I am writing about is separate from the KLSE loans. From the same 10-Q:
At June 30, 1996 the Company had an unsecured note receivable in the amount of $1,200,000 which bears interest at 12% per annum and is due September 1, 1996 with options to be extended through December 1, 1996. At June 30, 1996 accrued interest on the note receivable amounted to $12,800. Subsequent to June 30, 1996 the full principal amount and accrued interest on this note receivable were paid in full.
The time of this filing was in August,1996.
As a matter of fact, it appears that some of the proceeds of the repayment of the loan I question were used to further increase the KLSE debt.
Hope this helps.
john |
