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.

Non-Tech : Versatech (VITC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sid Turtlman who wrote (330)	4/29/1998 7:47:00 PM
From: jperry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 435

Sid....I decided to post to the board instead of privately again. I thought it would be helpful if other investors could get involved in the discussions. I think both of us have hashed and rehashed our own opinions, maybe it's time we get out of the way and give others the chance express their ideas. In our last private postings we talked about having educated discussions, focusing more on technical issues. There are always questions raised with the financial statements of most any company, including some of the biggest(Waste Management, Kellogg Co., IBM - see Forbes, March 23). Regardless of what you may say, financial statements can sometimes be difficult to understand without asking for points of clarification from those individuals that prepared them. So, if one has a doubt about a figure, one cannot just ASSUME that the figure is incorrect or "rigged." Furthermore, you cannot expect someone on this thread, who had absolutely nothing to do with preparing the financial statements, to be able to answer those questions. Hence the phrase: "audited financials" DHMG's financials were audited by accountants. I think we probably have to trust these people. I just don't think an accountant would risk going to JAIL or loosing his/her practice just so DHMG's stock will rise. However, if you choose NOT to trust the accountants, ask THEM to justify their figures. Don't just come on this thread crying rape. As for some of your questions to Hagen, I had a question about Frama as well. Yet, I must say the other questions are trivial. The one about the new accountants not coming on until weeks later. The new accountants were in Utah. It takes time to arrange meetings, set up retainers, etc. You know that Sid. You've been in business. As for the one about 88% of business being done with company shareholders, their clients probably like what Hagen is doing so they buy his stock. However, I will say I did call around on the Frama figure. It was a while ago so I don't remember the details, but the explanation was satisfactory. I'll give you the basic jist. If my explanation is not complete enough, as I am sure it will not be, call Hagen. Frama is a popular European artist. Hagen traded some collectibles to Frama for artwork. Hagen couldn't decide if he wanted to take 15 or so original pieces and sell them via DHMG or do a mass production exclusive lithograph edition and sell it via Universal. While he was running the numbers and making his decision, Frama issued 1.4 million in stock to DHMG (the stock, from what I remember, was a registered PPO at $1). Hence, the company shows the $1.4 Frama figure. Hagen concludes that it would be more profitable to do the exclusive lithograph series. The edition goes to print. The prints are delivered and the stock goes back to Frama.... Hence, no Frama figure. "Disappearing stock" NO of course not! Just a case of DHMG taking collateral until Hagen could make up his mind how best to do the Frama artwork deal. That wasn't that hard now was it? JPerry