SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : 1st Net Technologies ( FNTT ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: lindend who wrote (1648)7/15/1999 4:07:00 PM
From: Q.  Respond to of 1827
 
FNTT's no-name auditor: Bewley, Argy & Company

This auditor has NEVER before audited a form 10k for a reporting public company, according to my full-text search of the Edgar database. Not a single one.

Moreover, if you try to find the phone number of this firm in a web search, you will come up empty.

Only by phoning the telephone company's directory service was I able to find that there is a "Bewley & Co.", which has the same phone number as a "Mark Bewley, CPA".



To: lindend who wrote (1648)7/15/1999 4:11:00 PM
From: Q.  Respond to of 1827
 
The co. now posts a purposefully-incomplete version of the audited financial statements.

In the 7-page document that now appears on the FNTT site, it says, at the bottom of each page, "The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements."

Those notes are ABSENT from the web site.

They were included in the full version, which the co. previously posted, until they pulled the file when Linden posted here that they reveal how Greg and Chatfield have a direct ownership of zero shares.

I have seen the notes in the original full version, and they contain plenty of information that should scare away any possible investor.



To: lindend who wrote (1648)7/15/1999 4:14:00 PM
From: Q.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1827
 
Among the notes that FNTT pulled from its website are the ideas that I summarize in the following posts.

Remember that these notes are an "integral part of the financial statements" that were audited, yet the co. now chooses to present investors with a carefully edited version of the audited statements.

I believe it is unethical for Greg Writer to publish an auditor's opinion without also providing the full financial statements that the auditor gave its opinion upon.



To: lindend who wrote (1648)7/15/1999 4:17:00 PM
From: Q.  Respond to of 1827
 
FNTT paid a mere $20,000 for their online mall, NetZing or whatever they call it, and when the auditor was done with their statements, they wrote off the ENTIRE investment in this company.

Maybe they weren't too impressed with the commercial prospects of publishing Brooke's singing?

It appears to me that this was the company's first move to become an "internet company", and it was a complete bust.




To: lindend who wrote (1648)7/15/1999 4:19:00 PM
From: Q.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1827
 
The notes indicated that FNTT paid only $75 k for Mariah, the IP telephony acquisition.

Not 75 Million.

Just 75 Thousand.

That's all.

How is FNTT supposed to compete with the giants who are involved in IP telephony?

How are investors supposed to believe this stock merits at $25 M market cap on account of something like that?

FNTT has touted Mariah, when touting its stock. But FNTT did that touting without revealing how little Mariah was really worth.