Plastics to Oil - Pyrolysis and Secret Catalysts and Alterna Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Plastics to Oil - Pyrolysis and Secret Catalysts and Alterna

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: jaxstraw who wrote (30721)	1/14/2013 8:52:07 PM
From: the_big_guy	Read Replies (2) of 53574

Not entirely different. Pretty similar actually. GAAP is GAAP. I would be interested in what you mean by cases "JBII has filed only in Canada ". We are not talking about those libel lawsuits again, are we? We are not going to go THERE again, not really.. When it comes to securities legislation, I think you will find that the two systems are pretty similar. But, I am no expert. The Nortel accusations would take some time for me to understand. But, were they not moving "accruals" around in order to declare profits at convenient times in order to trigger bonusses? So, changing the interpretation of GAAP to suit their financial needs. Same thing as JBI. DIfferent financial need. DIfferent matters under interpretation. I actually spent some time at Nortel. It was one of the most political places to work that I ever experienced. Very very weird culture. Most important thing ever was meetings. People would get up in the middle of a training course to go to a meeting, then return. They would miss half the course. Run by a bunch of Engineers that would not listne to Marketing. NOthing bu power struggles... no one wold take a risk.. only a few years from a Pension (which is not in the courtrooms as well). All in all a very forgettable company. From what I understand the defendants were able to prove that they never directly ordered anyone to do anything dishonest. Or they did not know, were fed false information. Well, that could be the shoot the messenger thing. it was well known that it would make you unpopular at the company not to tout the company line, whatever it was. Until it was too late... IMO there is only one corrrect interpretation of GAAP and most accountants will come to the same conclusion. Whether it is Media Credits or Accruals. I have worked on Accruals. It is not rocket science. The key point in both cases is that the CEO and CFO "ought to have known" even if they did not know. If you are in a position of leadership you cannot simply blame the people below you. That is the standard for misrepresentation in Canada, as far as I know. And fraud is the same thing as misrepresentation. Taken literally, it is almost indefensible.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next