I spoke with several well-placed YONG sources in last couple days. The crux of the matter appears to be continuing active discussions between YONG management and KPMG on 2012 year-end bad debt reserve amount on which KPMG will sign off in the 2012 audit.
Specifically, YONG management's preferred 2012 year-end reserve balance implicit in the guidance of last Friday's Form NT 10-K for 2012 full-year results of approximately 14% revenue growth and 10% net income growth reflect a 2012 year-end bad debt reserve that is materially higher than KPMG are willing to sign off on in the 2012 audit given KPMG's exposure to litigation on this in the U.S. the probability of which is very high given the pending well-financed going private transaction. In short, the 2012 financial results on which KPMG is willing to sign off for the 2012 audit are materially better than those reported in last Friday's Form NT 10-K filed by YONG management.
You're sources huh? The same sources you claim you have in the scam CBEH which is currently trading at 35 cents after being filmed faking production of their biodiesel?
If it's your "theory" fine, but don't just blow hot air and pretend like you have any idea. Personally it's a hopeful theory, but why would the Nasdaq halt trading based on just that discrepancy?
Mcfly--your silliness and consistent lack of sources for your grandiose theories and assertions is well-documented by many others on this and other boards. I emphatically stand by the strong credibility of my well-placed sources both on YONG and CBEH. I have stated previously that I have a large long position in CBEH at cost basis $0.46 and I recently have become a meaqningful long in YONG using rolling strikes of call options.
waldoa, your posting makes perfect sense to me. It seems KPMG is trying to make reasonable judgments on the bad debt issue. If so, they are also protecting our interests as well as ensuring the statements are correct.
There must be accounting rules that KPMG can show yong management that the debt reserve boundaries must be between so and so to pass mustard.
Regardless, 3 things are being asked by NAS:
1. Status of buyout
2. A/R details
3. As is audited results without the massaging due Apr 4th.
Once again, I applaud NAS's vigilance in shutting down trading to prevent short sellers fleecing the longs (margin calls) and fearful.
So if I"m following you, this is the reverse of the usual management/auditor positions, right? And KMPG is concerned they could get sued if they sign off on what management wants because it would tend to make the buyout price of 6.60 look more attractive than KPMG thinks? Or am I missing something.....
You hit the nail on the head. What a sick situation where management tries to lowball their own achievements so they can get away with an incredibly low offer. Come on management, pay your long suffering investors a decent price for the company. You should do the honorable thing so we can all save face.