That jolly conference call | OSTK Message Board Posts

Overstock.com, Inc.

  OSTK website


  • Get 3 months of ad-free premium service for every $25 you contribute
    to support critical site improvement efforts.
    With no recurring subscription
    to worry about, this an ideal way to test drive our premium service.

    Premium features, such as multi-message viewing (i.e., being able to open
    up to 100 messages with a single click) can save you lots of time
    over the course of a busy day, to say nothing of an entire year!
    Watch this 2-min video to see why premium is right for you.


    *Offer expires at midnight

OSTK   /  Message Board  /  Read Message

 

 






Keyword
Subject
Between
and
Rec'd By
Authored By
Minimum Recs
  
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board
Msg  37999 of 44308  at  11/20/2009 3:15:27 PM  by

medchal


That jolly conference call

Has everybody had a chance by now to look over the transcript of the Chuckles the Clown conference call held on 11/18?  All of Overstock's conference calls are truly in a class by themselves.
 
Chestnut:  "...people will sense the complexity of the question too, because this is not a pretty simple right/wrong; there's a lot of facts and information that, hopefully, we'll disclose through this conference call that will be helpful."
 
Johnson:  "....yes, I agree -- this is arcane -- how many accounting angels can dance on the headof a pin?"
 
Complexity; arcane?  We're talking about whether to recognize revenue in the quarter it was earned.  There's nothing "complex" or "arcane" about Overstock's books except the constant attempt to cook them.
 
"Dr." Byrne:  "Can I put this on my balance sheet, because I know I'm going to -- I found $100 somebody owes me, can I put $100 on my balance sheet and run that through my income statement?"  Yeah.  It's called accounts receivable!  If you're not sure you'll collect all of it, you establish a reserve.  Arcane, huh?
 
Chestnut:  "...remember, Patrick, fourth quarter 2008 was a retail Armageddon. And so all of this was put in the context of a pretty uncertain fourth quarter and where is the environment going to go?"  So:  The environment being less than rosy (or possibly, resembling the final batle between good and evil), one doesn't post earnings properly, just to be "conservative"?
 
Byrne:  "Now, the SEC, at least in their questions, seemed to be saying, well, isn't it true that anything -- and I'm not dissing the SEC. I am dissing [is people on the scene] {can't account for the previous meaningless "is people on the scene" "correction" in the original transcript}-- I mean, I think Grant Thornton -- we're not going to be exchanging Christmas cards."
 
Why didn't you finish that thought about the S. E. C.?  We don't care who's on your Christmas card list.  (And, by the way, you certainly are "dissing"--if you can't find a better term--the S. E. C.)
 
Byrne:  "The SEC is just doing its job ...God bless them, that's their right'  Nice of you to acknowledge that!
 
Johnson:  "Let's just take a look at what the fog of war was like then."  The fog of war?  Ah, then, all is forgiven.  People do lose their heads during a bayonet charge, and of course the whole world always looks like a bayonet charge to "Dr. Byrne".
 
Byrne:  "...what did the balance sheet in God's eye look like as of December 31...?"  Ah, I am checkmated again.  Invoking the deity, whose knowledge you presume to have duplicated, will always win an argument.
 
"We had a choice -- you know, this isn't some mistake that slipped under everyone's radar.  There was a choice...."  That doesn't square very well with "Antar's ramblings are gibberish. Show them to any accountant and they will confirm. He has no clue....  It's just a guy on a street corner, spouting gibberish, hoping someone will toss him a quarter," which statement I presume now apples to the S. E. C.

It just goes on and on like that.  Gee, I'll bet some of you are happy that you've invested your money with this brain trust.  (My favorite response to Byrne is exemplified by Chestnut's reply to him, "No, no. I think you're stating it very, very well...."  Way to brown up that nose, Chestnut!)
 
It appears that the Team is trying to butter up PcW for knuckling under to their accounting demands before the S. E. C. got involved.  Want to be it doesn't work (if that's what they have in mind)?


     e-mail to a friend      printer-friendly     add to library      
| More
Recs: 0     Views: 18934
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board


About Us  •  Contact Us  •  Follow Us on Twitter  •  Members Directory  •  Help Center  •  Advertise
Not a member yet? What are you waiting for? Create Account
Want to contribute? Support InvestorVillage by donating
© 2003-2019 Investorvillage.com. All rights reserved. User Agreement
   
Financial Market Data provided by
.


Loading...