I have to admit I was wrong about JBI-DE ceasing to exist in 2009...
Justice37 Share Friday, February 04, 2011 11:40:07 PM
Re: jimmenknee post# 91888 Post # of 91909
To be honest I meant a factory that recycles plastic, they would reject the load, but a if it arrived at a recycling facility as I indicated, it would still be acceptable, it's plastic that has been processed in one way or another.
Regarding the WSB audit, I was going to get around to a response. I have to admit I was wrong about JBI-DE ceasing to exist in 2009, it was a misunderstanding on my part and not an attempt to decieve, I admit my mistakes. I've talked to a few about the company and I'm satisfied with the answers.
I'm also satisfied in reading the amended 10-Q that Withum, Smith and Brown (WSB) had a good look at all aspects of the company before 310 Holdings was purchased. I read the whole damn thing and they mention JBI-DE a few times. It's also clear that WSB didn't just audit JBI-NV, they looked at all aspects of JBI in 2008 as well and way before JBI purchased 310 Holdings, it's all there. Withum looked at everything, including rent paid back in 2006. You seem to be saying that a well respected, top 50 accounting firm, would do the 2008 and 2009 books for a company called John Bordynuik Inc., and not look at accounting issues related to dealings with another company called John Bordynuik Inc out of Delaware. They would look at the assets coming in from that other company, JB providing services but not taking a fee worth over $40,000 related to some of his tape reading, purchase of assets, and not have a look at things in detail considering that the reverse merger into the DE entity initially came from JBI who WSB were auditing. So JBI-DE directly relates to WSB's mandate in how it was purchased and how part of the assets were put into 310 Holdings, later JBI-NV. I don't see how such an accounting firm would not look to see if anything could compromise the company legally especially considering the close connection the the two JBI entities have to each other. Highly unlikely. Take your conspiracy theory elsewhere. Read the amended 2009 10-Q that WSB signed off on. It's all there.
I've also had to ask some more questions, I'm satisfied with the answers, especially some posts from Brig88, it's been explained.
One last time. WSB's mandate in auditing JBI, goes way beyond 310 Holdings. It seems WSB and the SEC is more than okay with how things have been dealt with.
I do appreciate you pointing out where I was wrong in regards to JBI-DE. Thanks.
siliconinvestor.com
jimmenknee Share Saturday, February 05, 2011 12:48:06 AM
Re: Justice37 post# 91892 Post # of 91909
We'll agree to disagree on the post-consumer morph to industrial sources as given in the draft permit...
The rest of your very long post does not answer the 2 questions that are important in order to understand what happened to the cash from JBI-DE. Duly noting your satisfaction does not equal the actual accounting.
So until/unless some actual wording addresses the > $1 million left in JBI-DE, it remains a mystery. Please show me a post that addresses the money (I have read the post where John explains Expedite 2-- the money on the balance sheet is not addressed).
Quote:
I'm sure a company that went through the books as thoroughly as WSB has a good handle on the whereabouts and status of all "cookie jars".
All this new post did was land us right back to here from the original post. Sure or not-- there is no specific accounting-- period.
siliconinvestor.com
Justice37 Share Saturday, February 05, 2011 1:10:42 AM
Re: jimmenknee post# 91894 Post # of 91909
Seems you still have not read the amended 2009 10-Q. Here it is:
sec.gov
Previously you have indicated that WSB only went as far back as 310 Holding, not the case, it covers a lot of JBI dealings including 2008, they were re-done, and pre 310 Holding JBI accounting. JBI-DE was looked at from the begining to when assets and service in kind was provided to 310 Holdings (later renamed JBI). To claim an accounting firm would sign off without looking at transactions with JBI-DE is beyond belief. Enjoy the read.
I'll also let JBI know they are processing the wrong kind of plastic and to not accept processed plastic from recycling facilities and the rejected loads given to manufacturers using recycled plastic.
siliconinvestor.com
jimmenknee Share Saturday, February 05, 2011 1:37:47 AM
Re: Justice37 post# 91896 Post # of 91909
Of course I read the amended 10Q. I didn't even confuse it with a 10K like you referenced.
WSB did not audit John Bordynuik Inc-Canada, nor John Bordynuik Inc-DE-- period.
The 2008 references-- as year-over-year or quarter-over-quarter --in the Q and K are numbers associated with the entity FKA 310 Holdings. It has to be this way as the SEC filing company is assigned a CIK as a means to maintain its history regardless who or what takes it over or even how many times it changes (more practice reading other company filings may help stem confusion.)
Please point to a 2008 JBI-DE and/or JBI-CAN related entry.
Quote:
I'll also let JBI know they are processing the wrong kind of plastic and to not accept processed plastic from recycling facilities and the rejected loads given to manufacturers using recycled plastic.
Wonderful-- please don't do it on my account though; but would appreciate a report back on what you find out
siliconinvestor.com
Justice37 Share Saturday, February 05, 2011 4:47:35 AM
Re: jimmenknee post# 91899 Post # of 91909
First, I didn't say they audited JBI-DE, I said they looked at all the transactions related from acquisition to to selling of DE assets and services. Yes they did look at JBI Canada, it's in the filing, the 2008 statements had to be done again. WSB mentions many aspects of the business before the purchase of 310 Holdings. It's a long report, are you sure you read it all. I did reference the 10-K, it's the most recent amendment for the 2009 fiscal year. Perhaps that is why you keep missing it.
John was informed about some of your plastic claims, made him shake his head again (honest, he shook his head), I'm sorry it seems you are wrong again.
I went over rawnoc's information regarding the mystery million, I agree with him, the math is correct. It really isn't a mystery, basic business it seems, but not for everyone, it had to be pointed out to me too. Same with some other claims others have made in the past about the books. Ask people who know what they are talking about and all is made clear for me. It's been almost 1.5 years since the mystery million and the 3.5 million scams, I saw JB and other JBI executives recently, they were not behind bars. WSB did their job, so will Ernst and Young, I'll take their word for it, sorry.
siliconinvestor.com
------
Justice37 Share Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:05:10 AM
Re: jimmenknee post# 91459 Post # of 91483
JBI-DE hasn't been in existence since the Spring of 2009.
siliconinvestor.com
Justice37 Share Wednesday, February 02, 2011 10:24:19 AM
Re: jimmenknee post# 91464 Post # of 91909
Link doesn't work. Minor issue. I've never lied or misled you, never will, JBI-DE no longer exists. Ended the Spring of 2009. "SEC dark". Very conspiracy theory to me. It's not dark, is over. JBI-DE was never public, ever, the first time I owned "publicly traded shares" were the 310 Holdings (later changed to JBI) shares, Spring of 2009. That's the truth.
I also have to disagree with you about Withum, they looked at all assets, that would include where they came from, they have access to the same filings you do but more, they signed off on it. This is a non-issue.
siliconinvestor.com |
