Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scion who wrote (5532)	3/10/2011 4:25:31 PM
From: SteveF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53574

Rawnoc's desperation to increase the JBII ihub board post count is quite funny.

To: scion who wrote (5532)	3/10/2011 4:29:03 PM
From: scion	Respond to of 53574

In regards to the way I read the amended 8-K, I was completely wrong. WSB's audit of the 2008 accounting was in relation to 310 Holdings. As to if they looked at aspects of JBI's business in relation to Delaware and Canada, I see some evidence it was accounted for in relation to the JBI-NV books but no evidence they were audited by WSB. You made your point. jimmenknee Share Saturday, February 05, 2011 1:37:47 AM Re: Justice37 post# 91896 Post # of 95813 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 95813 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 Saturday, February 05, 2011 3:14:26 PM Re: jimmenknee post# 91911 Post # of 95814 In regards to the way I read the amended 8-K, I was completely wrong. WSB's audit of the 2008 accounting was in relation to 310 Holdings. As to if they looked at aspects of JBI's business in relation to Delaware and Canada, I see some evidence it was accounted for in relation to the JBI-NV books but no evidence they were audited by WSB. You made your point. I don't want to belittle my above admission you were right by doing a "yes but no" so please understand I just pointing out another aspect of my last post. I am not convinced about your claim regarding the "mystery million" in JBI-DE. I looked at other evidence given to me and I have to agree you missed something. It's not an issue I own, you are discussing with another person posting. He's going to make you work for it just like he has in the past. I hope you are open minded enough to see that JBI just might be what they and others posting on this board, say it is. Doesn't hurt to say you were wrong about something, I do it all the time, helps me to learn and grow as a person. siliconinvestor.com