It is a related party transaction. Was any of this disclosed before this? This is again a method of using a public company to enrich one man and his family.
That trust is worthless WITH OR WITHOUT THE LOAN because it was originally valued pre-2008 VBT and was never, ever revalued. This is, in my opinion, stock fraud since the obvious need for a revaluation is a material event that shareholders of LPHI should have been made aware of. LPHI's ownership of the trust was used by a stock promoter in California as a reason to own the stock, claiming that hundreds of millions of dollars would be made. Too bad the maturities are turning out like the non-leveraged investments LPHI sold the public: They aren't happening as expected.
There is a market for this stock? I thought it was all bought up by the insiders and the licensees! Abbott might win, and he may not. The further this gets away from the trial court the more logic should prevail. Austin, Dallas and Waco are different, for sure. It doesn't matter to me because the SEC will almost certainly win except for the insider trading argument. Heck, they the SEC might even prove that making it icing on top of the fraud and stock fraud cake.
Kinda makes you think of another life settlement fraud (or two...or a dozen), doesn't it? Hey, you too can earn a return of 12%-14% just like Warren Buffet for simply signing on the dotted line. I just wonder how this version of the scam will work itself out.
Yeah, but they have a ton of net worth based on the bogus stock price that can be borrowed against. It was still pumped, and I am wondering who will keep pumping this when the insiders all dump.
May be he did fly a Huey and maybe not. It was the preferred mode of transportation in Viet Nam, kinda like what a checkered cab is in NYC. The SEC says Pardo is a "serial fraud recidivist" and not a "hero serial fraud recidivist." Thems fight'in words.
Everyone has to be careful about ethics, particularly if they were responsible for slinging mud at someone else claiming ethical misconduct. Just sayi'in. If I recollect, there was a signature on the bottom of an amicus brief signed by a Justin Blount. Or was it just Peden? Regardless of the author, those thoughts relating to post transaction entrepreneurial effort could come back to haunt Life Partners.
Here is another good read from docstoc : Prepared Testimony of Scott Peden President and General Counsel He is very concerned about the rights of seniors.
It is called, "Ten Core Commitments" and can be found by GOOGLE search of "How To Be Successful with Abundant Income" docstop
Did you guys and gals see the Abundant presentations online? "How to be successful with Abundant Income" is one of my favorites, suggesting that each rep invest their own money and that they sell this stuff through ROTH IRAs (instead of having the client use cash). Several times there is reference to it NOT being too good to be true. Yeah, right. If you are going to bury someone, doing what is in that presentation is the way to do it.
The Zelesky law firm is advertising for their clients.
Did you guys see the latest industry numbers? Without the STOLI #$%$ the industry dropped another 50%+ to $2.1 billion in transactions. The trend has been for negative industry growth, and this means less chance for increasing the top line of Life Partners. So, why is there still a dividend?
If you want to pump & dump this stock, buy shares below $3 and then have someone on the Left Coast promote the company using half-truths or outright lies (like about that trust investment). Keep putting in opening orders higher than the close for 500 shares while the suckers are buying. Then sell, letting it drop by 30% or so and do it again and again. The problem is that there are no earnings and the assets are going down the toilet faster than the burrito I had for dinner last night. At some point the stock has to trade at or below book value, and by then the pump and dumpers will be concentrating on other stocks.
Who were the "unrelated" buyers? I am wondering what entity bought into what seems to be a bad investment. Was it the Reg.D offerings or individuals?
That cash was before the Dividend Payable of $1,869,195! Cash is dropping fast! And don't forget the cash balance includes the Proceeds from Sales of Investments in Policies of $9,817,929.
Premium Advances is up by $2 million
Accounts Payable is up by $800,000, a significant amount.
The Investments in Policies still has most in the "Thereafter" category, well beyond the life expectancy.
Revenues only 18.9 million. Operating income is a negative $8.2 million. Net income is a negative $2.9 million. Working Capital is down to $11.4 million and cash is down to $7.6 million. There will be nothing left soon if the dividend continues!
The 3Q ending November 30, 2012 was reported on January 9, 2013 (received January 6, 2013) . The last 10K was on May 11, 2012 (why rush when there is zero good news?). There is no change in auditor and not restatements, so I am hopeful we see how bad things are next week. Then again, why rush when there may be zero good news? You are correct in that before the period of late filings the 10Ks came out in mid-May.
Is the Commission now going after past auditors? This stock fraud angle is looking more effective than Howey. I hope the new CFO and auditors know what they are doing regarding that trust. They should hope it isn't a bust.
...until the financial results are published for the last quarter. Whenever a company cannot produce enough cash flow to cover expenses (this includes dividends), an investor has to wonder how long it will stay in business. The bullish pumper of the stock contends cash flow will rain from the sky from the leveraged trust investment that, as we all know, is not performing well do date. The bears contend more of the same we have seen in the past few quarters, with cash flow reduced from legal expenses, horrible sales and cash continuing to fly out the door in the form of a dividend with over 51% of it enriching one man.The bears see cash being stripped out of the company before it goes under.
OK, then. Who is correct? If it is the bulls, what should we expect in terms of any factor that will increase cash flow, and by now much? It it is the bears, at what rate will cash deteriorate now that there are few assets left to sell? This inquiring mind wants to know.