Browsing through the 10-k (first time I have read a prkr 10-K) I find that the company owns aircraft with a depreciated value of $200,000+. I surmise that these boys have a corporate jet which is utterly ridiculous for a company with no revenues and continual dilution of shareholders through stock offerings to fund operations!!
>>>Browsing through the 10-k (first time I have read a prkr 10-K) I find that the company owns aircraft with a depreciated value of $200,000+. I surmise that these boys have a corporate jet which is utterly ridiculous for a company with no revenues and continual dilution of shareholders through stock offerings to fund operations!! <<<
Well, you many need to read another 1,000 10K's or return to grade school to learn to read. It says this is the ORIGINAL COST, not depreciated cost, that it is a fractional share, and, most importantly, that it's been SOLD:
>>Property and equipment, at cost, consisted of the following at December 31, 2008 and 2007:
Aircraft (held for sale) 200,550 231,250
In October 2008, we entered into a firm commitment to sell our ownership percentage in an aircraft. The net carrying value of this asset was written down to approximately $185,000, representing the quoted selling price of the asset less the estimated costs to sell. An impairment loss of $30,700 was included in the accompanying statement of cash flows and in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying statement of operations. We completed the sale of this asset in January 2009. <<
If you had any clue about the value of things, which you apparently don't (including PRKR stock), you would know you won't find any corporate jets selling for $200,000 no matter how used. This is obviously a time share, and a small one at that, from someone like NetJets.
You sound like a techie that doesn't see the light of day too often. I guess the sun blinded you, eh?
So let me get this straight, "States" - you are a financial guy, asked by a money manager to "vet" PV, and you have never even looked at their 10-K before? You, sir, are a total fraud, and obviously Brian, the Shredvauld sycophant, also known as Commr51 and several other names here. And by the way, the aircraft is a nit - i think an old time share deal they've been trying to unload, that is worth almost nothing, and probably saved the company money for awhile vs. flying out of JAX.
How does this statement by "States" <... my background is financial whereas yours would seem to be technical based on earlier posts.>
And this statement by "States" <3. As I said in an earlier post, I got involved with PRKR when a money manager friend asked me to vet the company during a private placement.>
Go with what "States" just said - <(first time I have read a prkr 10-K)
1. My background is financial but also includes many friends in the high technology industries. The vetting I was asked to do related to the home router product. There was no need for me to read a 10-k to vet this product or to read a 10-k since then as I have only a passive interest in this company. I read the 10-k today in response to your earlier post citing statements in it, and since I have probably read over 1000 10-k's in my career I know how to read them quickly and what to look for, which is how I picked up the airplane info. 2. I am sorry to upset your paranoid nature, but I am not Brian or any other of the monikers you assign to me. 3. If you think that flying on a private jet is cheaper than using "public transportation" you are an idiot. 4. Using a private jet is not a "nit" but an indication of a management and BOD with profligate spending habits, particularly in a company with no revenues and large losses. 5. Your reply to my post makes it certain that you work for PRKR.