Good work, Charlie. Your own effort cleared up your own doubts. Now this particular issue can be laid to rest. However, other questions obviously remain.
For example, I find the ensuing exchange of interest:
"ANALYST(Brian Wood): I guess without that exception you wouldn't have been able to recognize those revenues?
Ray Fritz(CFO): Well, I guess we would have been able to recognize, but we wanted to make sure that we were still in compliance with the contract with Rogers. And that's why we asked them for an exemption, (an) exception to the contract."
So, the concern appears to be not so much with recognition of revenues, which, according to the filing, they did in-fact NOT recognize, but as to whether they were in compliance with the K. This comment, IMHO, implies the existence of underlying issues pertaining to the agreement b/w TERN & Rogers that TERN is focused on keeping "clean." Such comment may be viewed as ominous of potential trouble ahead, but this is just speculation on my part. Perhaps, the latest split by DOCSIS from IEEE on the PHY standard which has put TERN "under the gun" has something to do with it.
In short, I just don't understand why someone would be buying TERN at these present levels. |
