2014.09.14 12:21 daiyuesen Let's fight back against student loan debt servitude
2024.05.21 20:52 Region-Formal At The Market offerings and stock dilutions: why there's more here than initially meets the eye...
submitted by Region-Formal to Superstonk [link] [comments] |
2024.05.21 20:14 Cultural_Essay_9546 Trouble receiving callback from a live employee? (Charged twice for registration)
2024.05.21 15:01 FelicitySmoak_ Tuesday, May 21, 2013 - Jackson v. AEG Live Day 15
Trial Day 15 submitted by FelicitySmoak_ to WhereWasMJToday [link] [comments] Katherine, Rebbie and Trent Jackson are at court. LA Times reported that the Jacksons offered a settlement. Kevin Boyle , a lawyer for Katherine Jackson and Michael's kids , said they offered to settle the lawsuit against AEG, but that they never got an answer. Kevin Boyle said the family made the offers in January & March. Boyle would not provide details but said AEG's insurance would have paid, which means they could have settled the case without them paying a dime of their money. He said AEG has never offered to settle & they haven't apologized. Marvin Putnam, an attorney for AEG, said it was inappropriate to discuss settlement discussions: "We don't settle matters that are utterly baseless. We believe that is the case in this matter. I can't see why we would consider a settlement as anything other than a shakedown"CNN Reports there was a snack controversy during trial: AEG lawyers gave a bag of peppermint candy to the bailiff to hand out to the jury this week. Even Katherine Jackson enjoyed the treat but Jackson's lawyer raised an objection, suggesting jurors might be influenced if they realized the source of the sweets. A compromise was reached. Each side can provide snacks for jurors, but they'll be placed at the bailiff's desk before jurors enter court so they have no clue who brought it. Shawn Trell Testimony Jackson direct AEG Live General Counsel, Shawn Trell, told jurors that he had forgotten that Kenny Ortega was working under a signed contract. Trell said he met with his attorneys last night and reviewed one doc -- Kenny Ortega's contract. "He had a written contract," Trell said. "I remember the email dynamic. I'm not too proud to admit that I didn't recall the cover contract," Trell said he was changing his previous testimony to add that Ortega had a written contract, not only emails between him and AEGNext topic was Insurance: Cancellation/Non-Appearance/Sickness. Trell said he started working on insurance for the tour in November of 2008. Panish showed several chains of emails where the parties talked about the insurance for the tour Email from Bob Taylor insurance broker to Trell on 1/7/09: "Prior to speaking with carriers we ask the artist to attend medical with a doctor...A full medical with both blood/urine tests. The doctor also wants to review the medical records over the last 5 years to ensure full disclosure. Insurers require further medical examination to be carried out by their nominated doctor. They may restrict illness coverage or death from illness coverage until this examination has taken place"Email from 4/30/09 - Wooley to Trell : "We have no coverage against Michael sickness unless and until he submits to another medical in LondonEmail from 5/28/09 - Trell to Taylor: "We really need to get that medical done"Email from 6/23/09 - Trell to Taylor : "Any update on the availability of Term insurance?" (life insurance)Trell said if they secured life insurance, they would get money if Michael died. "We would get the money owed to us, yes," Trell testified.Trell also said he continued discussions with an insurance broker about additional coverage to recoup AEG Live's investment if the tour had to be canceled. Email from 6/24/09 -Taylor to Trell : "Insurers have refused to move on this. Huge amount of speculation in the media regarding artist's health. They feel if they're to consider providing illness to cover this particular artist, they must have very through medical report"Email from 6/25/09 - Gongaware to Taylor : "If we don't get sickness coverage, we are dropping this policy"Email from 6/25/09 - Taylor to Gongaware : "The consultation in London is critical. The doctor is holding the afternoon of the 6th July open at Harley St. But keep in mind the visit could take 2 hours plus"Next topic: Budget/Costs. Panish showed an email from AEG's Rick Webking to Michael's estate with 1st report of artist advances/expenses. This was a letter sent to the estate containing the expenses incurred, Trell said. "It seems to me we submitted this report for their review, I don't see any request for payment," Trell said.Trell said he spoke with Randy Phillips and Paul Gongaware about Michael's physical condition prior to coming to testify. "I had heard about rehearsals in which Mr. Jackson was fantastic," Trell saidTrell said he's aware of email from Ortega saying doctor was not allowing Michael to attend rehearsal on June 14, 2009. "I was aware of the doctor not allowing him to attend rehearsal," Trell saidEmail from 6/17/09 from Phillips: "...Ortega, Gongaware, Dileo, and his doctor Conrad from Vegas and I have an intervention with him to get him to focus and come to rehearsal"Email from 6/17/09 from Gongaware to Phillip's assistant: "We need a physical therapist and a nutritionist"Email from Production Manager - Gongaware/Phillips on 6/19/09 : "Paul/Randy I'm not bring a drama queen here. Kenny asked me to notify you both Michael was sent home without stepping foot on stage. He was a basket case and Kenny was concerned he would embarrass himself on stage, or worse yet, be hurt. The company is rehearsing right now, but the DOUBT is pervasive"Email from Randy Phillips to Tim Leiweke on 6/19/09 : "We have a huge problem here."Trell agreed with a statement by plaintiff's attorney, Brian Panish, that company executives knew by then there was a "deep issue" with Jackson Does Trell consider that exchange a "red flag" that AEG Live should have noticed, Panish asked. "I would take it seriously, as I believe Mr. Phillips did," Trell answered. "I don't know I would use the word 'red flag'One of the emails shown to the jury was from Jackson estate co-executor John Branca, sent 5 days before Jackson's death & marked 'confidential': "I have the right therapist/spiritual advisosubstance abuse counselor who could help (recently helped Mike Tyson get sober and paroled) Do we know whether there is a substance issue involved (perhaps better discussed on the phone)The email was sent the same day that a meeting was held at Jackson's home with Murray. No further info given to jury. Trell said Mr. Phillips never told him about this email Email from Ortega to Randy Phillips on 6/20/09: (chain of emails) "I honestly don't think he is ready for this based on his continued physical weakening and deepening emotional state"Trell said he didn't see these emails. He said he spoke with Randy Phillips about Phillips' perception of Michael, in order to prepare for testifying, but not about specific emails. Trell has been designated as the most qualified person to speak on behalf of AEG Email from Phillips to Gongaware on 6/20/09 at 1:52 am : "Tim and I are going to see him tomorrow, however, I'm not sure what the problem is Chemical or Physiological?"From Gongaware to Phillips, on 6/20/09 at 5:59 am : "Take the doctor with you. Why wasn't he there last night?"From Phillips to Gongaware, on 6/20/09 at 2:01 pm : "He is not a psychiatrist so I'm not sure how effective he can be at this point obviously, getting him there is not the issue. It is much deeper"Trell said Randy Phillips went to a handful of rehearsals, three at the Forum and two at Staples Center. The head of the marketing department attended rehearsal on June 23, 2009. "She was blown away by it," Trell testified.He said he was unaware of issues with Jackson at rehearsals. "I knew of no problems with Michael Jackson at all",Trell testified.Trell said he never saw the emails from Phillips directing people to exclude images from This Is It of Michael looking "skeletal" while rehearsing. "What were his observations of Michael's physical condition during rehearsal," Trell said. "I asked for his (Phillips) personal opinion."Next line of questioning is about human resources and background checks. Trell said they can be valuable and useful tools when hiring. Background check costs around $40 to $125. Trell said AEG Live could afford this fee. "We don't do background checks on independent contractors," Trell said. Trell said he was involved in the hiring by AEG Live for the This Is It tour. His department was responsible for retaining independent contractors. Trell said he is not familiar with background check process for hiring. "I am not familiar with the process of doing background checks," Trell said. "No training." Panish: "There was no hiring criteria for the This Is It tour, correct?"Trell: "Not to my knowledge" Trell testified that when it comes to independent contractors, they have either worked with the artists, AEG or known in the industry. Trell agreed that no background check was done on anyone working on the This Is It tour. AEG Live General Counsel Shawn Trell told jurors that no legal or financial checks were done involving Conrad Murray or anyone else who worked as an independent contractor on the This Is It shows. Depending on the nature of the position, a background could be done, Trell said, like for potential employees in the financial area. Trell said he thought a background check would be appropriate for people working in financial roles, but not tour personnel who weren't employees of AEG As to independent contractors, Trell said there's no supervision and monitoring like there's for employees Panish: "You don't do anything to check into background, supervise or protect the artist?"Trell: "No, safety is a concern" Trell said that AEG did not hire Murray, that the doctor was like many independent contractors, "When they leave the environment, what they do on their own time is their own business"Trell testified he doesn't believe the artist is more at risk because AEG Live doesn't do background checks "We did nothing to monitor Dr. Murray," Trell said. "We did not monitor whatever it was that he was doing, no.""It called for Michael Jackson being able to terminate Dr. Murray at will," Trell said about the contract. "If the concerts didn't go forward, and he was terminated under this provision, Dr. Murray would not be paid going forward," Trell explained As to Dr Murray being under dire financial straits, Trell said that he doesn't know if he agrees with it, everyone's perception is different Trell: "I certainly wasn't aware of it at the time"Panish: "Because you didn't check, right?" Trell: "That's right" "I don't think conflict of interests are a good thing, and we would want to prevent it," Trell said Email from Kathy Jorie to Shawn Trell on 6/24/09 at 12:54 am: Subject: Revised agreement with GCA Holdings/Dr. MurrayIt had two attachments Attachments: Revised Michael Jackson -AEG GCA Holdings Murray Agreement 6-18-09 Final MJ -- AEG GCA Holdings Agreement (Dr. Murray) 6-23-09Email chain from 6/23/09, 5:39pm from Jorrie to Wooley, Murray Subject: RE: Michael Jackson - Revised Agreement with GCA Holdings/Dr. Murray Email:"I have redlined the Word version so that you can see all of the revisions. In addition, I've attached clean PDF version for execution" (The email says that if Dr. Murray approved it, he was to print it, sign and send it back to Jorrie) Panish: "Did Ms. Jorrie call this contract a draft?"Trell: "She called it a Final Version" "Every document is a draft until it is executed," Trell said. Panish showed emails exchanged among AEG executives that contained drafts of Murray's contract. Although Murray had signed a contract with the company, neither Jackson nor anyone from AEG had added their signatures. Trell testified that a copy of the contract had never been sent to Jackson With Trell on the stand, Panish played part of an interview that AEG Live President Randy Phillips gave to Sky News television soon after Michael's death. "This guy was willing to leave his practice for a very large sum of money, so we hired him," Phillips said.Panish also showed jurors an e-mail between AEG lawyers suggesting that Phillips told other interviewers AEG Live "hired" Murray. Panish: "Isn't it true that Randy Phillips made numerous comments that AEG Live hired Dr. Murray?"Trell: "I know he has made that statement" Panish said AEG higher-ups became concerned after Phillips made such admission. Trell said he didn't know if that was true. Bruce Black is the General Counsel for parent company of AEG and AEG Live. Michael Roth is AEG's media relations Email from Kathy Jorrie to Bruce Black and Michael Roth on 8/25/09: Subject: AEG Live president says AEG Live hired Dr. Conrad MurrayPanish shows Trell a deposition, under oath, given by insurance broker Bob Taylor on another case. Trell said he has never seen or read it. Trell denied having a telephone conversation with Mr. Taylor where Trell asked him if a doctor's compensation was covered in the insurance. Panish: "Does that refresh your recollection that AEG was employing Dr. Murray?"Trell: "Mr. Taylor has this completely wrong" After lunch break, Brian Panish asked if Shawn Trell wanted to change anything else in his testimony, to which he said "No" Bruce Black, attorney for Anschutz, was present in the meeting with LAPD. Trell met with the police on 1/12/10. Trell told the police that day that Dr. Murray would receive $150,000 compensation per month. Trell also said that Dr. Murray requested and AEG would provide necessary medical equipment and a nurse. More than five months after Jackson's death, Trell said, he informed LAPD detectives that Murray initially requested $5 million to join the tour but eventually agreed to a salary of $150,000 a month for 10 months. Panish: "As far as you know, all the agreements written for TII tour was done under AEG Live Productions, right?"Trell: "Yes" Panish: "Was Dr. Murray trying to help AEG get insurance?" Trell: "The policy was in both names, so he was helping both parties" Trell said Dennis Hawk, who represented Michael, was in touch with Taylor regarding the insurance Panish: "As of June 2009, you don't even know whether Mr. Jackson had a personal managerTrell: "Well, my understanding at the time there were a couple of people acting in that capacity" Email on 6/2/09 from Randy Phillips to Jeff Wald: "Jeff, remember getting Michael to focus is not the easiest thing in the world and we still have no lawyer, business manager, or, even real manager in place. It is a nightmare!"Trell said the only time he saw an artist's signature required to retain an independent contractor was for Dr. Murray. Trell said his understanding was that Dr. Murray worked for Michael for 3 years; didn't know how many times MJ saw Dr. Murray. "I've never spoken with Dr. Murray ever. And I met/spoke with Mr. Jackson once," Trell said. "He was a significant expense," Trell testified about Dr. Murray.Trell said AEG Live didn't do anything to check Dr. Murray's competency as doctor, other than checking his physician license. Trell said AEG didn't do anything to determine Dr. Murray's financial conditions in 2009. Jury was shown an email that Phillips sent to Kenny Ortega on night of June 20, 2009. It was email urging Ortega to stand down. Email on 6/20/09 Phillips to Ortega : "Kenny it's critical that neither you, me, anyone around this show become amateur psychiatrist/physicians. I had a lengthy conversation with Dr. Murray, who I am gaining immense respect for as I get to deal with him more. He said that Michael is not only physically equipped to perform & discouraging him to will hasten his decline instead of stopping it. Dr. Murray also reiterated that he is mentally able to and was speaking to me from the house where he had spent the morning with Michael. This doctor is extremely successful (we check everyone out) and does not need this gig so he is totally unbiased and ethical"Panish asked Trell whether Phillips "characterization to Ortega, given no background check was done, was a lie". Trell responded that he didn't know what Phillips knew or was thinking when he wrote that email to Ortega. Trell also said he expected Randy Phillips to testify at some point during the trial, so he could address the email himself Panish then asked Trell, "Sir, you never checked out one single thing about Dr. Murray -- you've already told me that, correct?""As of the date of the email, that would've been correct",Trell said. When pressed by Panish, Trell said that Phillips' statement that Murray had been checked out, along with the executive's claim that the doctor 'does not need this gig' were inaccurate. "I don't know where Randy's understanding or impression comes from", Trell said.Trell testified that Phillips might have been "misinformed" or simply was stating his impression of the Las Vegas cardiologist Panish: "But no one at AEG checked Dr. Murray to see if he was successful or not, isn't that true?"Trell: "Yes" Panish then asked several pointed questions about whether Shawn Trell agreed with Phillips telling Ortega they'd checked Murray out. One of Panish's questions was whether Trell thought Phillips' email was 'acceptable conduct' Panish called Phillips' statement "a flat out lie" and asked Trell whether he agreed with it or if it signified how AEG did business. Trell said he didn't know what Phillips thought he knew when he wrote the message. "I know this statement is not accurate, but you'd have to speak with Mr. Phillips about what he thought or meant in saying it," Trell said. Panish: "That's a flat out lie, isn't it sir?"Trell: "I don't know what Mr. Phillips intended to say, this should be a question to him" Panish: "You don't know if he was successful or facing bankruptcy, did you?" Trell: "No" Trell: "I know the statement is not accurate. You have to speak with Mr. Phillips about what he meant to say" Panish: "Do you agree with the CEO of your company making untrue statements?" Trell: "I don't know that he didn't know it wasn't true when he said it" Trell said Phillips never told him that he checked Dr. Murray out. As to reference in Phillips' email about Dr. Murray being unbiased, ethical, not needing this gig, Trell said it was Phillips' impressions. He said AEG typically only runs background checks on candidates applying for full-time jobs with AEG, not independent contractors. Panish: "Isn't it true AEG Live does not do background check on independent contractors?"Trell: "That's true" Trell said that no one from AEG interviewed Dr. Murray because he was an independent contractor. "Did anyone from AEG ever at any time interview Dr. Murray", asked Brian Panish"No", Trell replied. Panish showed a document used by AEG entitled "Disclosure and Authorization to Conduct Background Check". Doc is used for employment, promotion, retention, contingent or the rate staffing, consulting, sub-contract work, or volunteer work. Panish asked if there was any reason why Dr. Murray was not given a background check. "He wasn't an employee, he wasn't applying for a full time position with the company," Trell explained.Trell said theoretically they could've asked to check Dr. Murray's background and credit. AEG Cross Jessica Bina began her examination by showing the letter submitted by AEG's CFO to the Estate of Michael Jackson for their review. She asked Shawn Trell about the estimate presented to Jackson's estate that included Murray's $300k fees. She asked why it was prepared. Shawn Trell said it was done at the request of the estate. He said Jackson's estate wanted to know state of tour finances when Jackson died. Trell said the report was requested by the Estate after a series of meetings after Michael's death. "The purpose of the meeting was to wind up the business affairs of the tour due to Michael's death", Trell said. "It was my understating in June Tohme was back in the picture in some capacity. I'm not sure which, Mr. DiLeo was in it too," Trell saidBina: "Is there any request for payment?" Trell: "No, there's no demand for payment, it's for review" Stebbins Bina asked about the inclusion of Murray's fee in the document. Bina showed the report that was attached to the letter. Murray's fee on the document had a footnote. Trell read what that footnote said, and explained why estate wasn't asked for Murray's fee. Next to "Management Medical" there's a reference to footnote 3. Note 3: 'Contract is not signed by Michael Jackson and such signature was condition precedent to any payment obligation' - Footnote on Murray fee.Trell testified Webking, the CFO for AEG, did not ask Michael's Estate for payment of Dr. Murray's salary "You testified you were somewhat confused (by the inclusion of the $300,000)?", Bina asked Trell as she projected the list, dated July 17, 2009, on a screen for jurors."Do you see there's something in parentheses?', Stebbins Bina asked, zooming in to blow up a footnote from AEG CFO Frederick Webking that stated Michael Jackson never signed Murray's contract, so its terms were not enforceable. "Is Mr. Webking asking the estate to pay?", Stebbins Bina asked Trell. "No", he replied, explaining that upon reflection he believed Mr. Webking was just being 'thorough' by including the $300,000 as a budgeted cost. "Did Mr. Webking make a mistake as you thought yesterday?",she asked. "No, he did not", Trell answered Second report made to the Estate on 9/18/09, there was no amount next to management medical. Stebbins Bina then showed a Sept. 2009 report of This Is It's finances to Michael Jackson's estate. Murray's fee is not listed in that document Trell went through his job description with AEG. He said he has five lawyers in his department and has worked on thousands of agreements. Trell explained what PMK is -- Person Most Knowledgeable, identified by the company to testify on its behalf. Trell said he didn't know about all the topics he was designated, so he had to do some studying and interviews with people As to Ortega's contract, Trell said he was aware of a string of emails being at least a part of the original agreement with Kenny. "When we were done here yesterday, I looked at Kenny Ortega's original agreement," Trell said.Trell noted he hadn't looked at Ortega's agreement since it was entered into in 2009. Before the afternoon break, Trell and jury were shown Kenny Ortega's tour agreement. It was signed in April 2009. The agreement was three pages of legalese, with several pages of emails attached that confirmed the terms. The first three pages included some paragraphs that described who owned the rights to This Is It content. A large number of emails are part of the agreement as exhibits. Trell said he recalled the emails exchange and admitted again not being proud of forgetting the cover contract portion. Bina showed Ortega's executed contract with everyone's signature on it. Trell said Kenny Ortega was paid after his contract was signed. Trell, Phillips and Kathy Jorrie were involved in drafting and negotiating the contract with Michael Jackson. For MJ, Trell said Dr. Tohme Tohme and attorneys Dennis Hawk and Peter Lopez represented him. He said there were multiple drafts. "It's my understanding they were talking to, or at least receiving offers from, a competitive of ours, Live Nation," Trell said.Trell also said that before signing an agreement with AEG, Jackson had been considering a tour offer from its main competitor, Live Nation. Bina showed the jury the final tour agreement. Trell said he went to MJ's home at Carolwood to sign it. Upon arrival, Trell said Mr. Jackson got up from where he was seated, and said 'Hi, welcome, I'm Michael." Trell said it was pretty funny, since he was a very distinct person. Trell said they shook hands, he had a good firm handshake and his voice was not what people think "He popped up, came over, introduced himself, was very cordial, there was a real positive energy, good vibe in the room," Trell said. "He seemed genuinely enthused," Trell added. "He had the contract in front of him, said he read every page, seemed very enthused." Trell said they all signed it and Mr. Jackson was really keen on the 3-D stuff, that he was already down the road in his mind. "I was probably there just a little less than an hour. And that was the only time I met him," Trell recalled.Bina discussed the contract for the tour agreement: A first class performance by Artist at each show on each of the approved itineraries. Contract: Artist shall perform no less than 80 minutes at each show, and the maximum show length for each show shall be 3.5 hours. Artist shall approve a sufficient number of shows on itineraries proposed by promoter or producer as to recoup the advances made.Trell said compensation was agreed on 90-10 split. Artist received 90% of what's defined contingent compensation. Trell explained to jury how concerts get paid for. One scenario is artist pays for production up front. A second scenario is that the promoter gives artist an advance, and then they use the money to put together the show. The third option, Trell said, is the artist pays someone like AEG Live to produce and promote the show, with costs to come out of their pay. Trell called the second and third option like an interest-free loan. In Jackson's case, AEG agreed to a 90/10 split of show's proceeds. Jackson would have received the 90% portion, Trell said. Jackson was also on the hook for a 5% production fee AEG Live was promoter & producer. "We advanced the money necessary to mount the tour," Trell explained. "It's interest free money".Trell testified that Jackson's advance, which covered his $100,000-a-month rent on his mansion and a $3-million payment to settle a lawsuit that would free up his performance rights, was considered a loan to be paid back to AEG. Part of the advance was to pay off the settlement agreement of $3 million in London court. The underlying dispute was that a company owned the rights for Jackson's live performance. "The rights needed to be freed up," Trell said.The advances were to be paid back to AEG Live before the split of revenue. Production Advances were capped to $7.5 million. Contract: Artist was responsible for all the production costs in excess of the cap and had to reimburse promoter. "Michael Jackson was known to have very elaborate productions," Trell said. "Production values can get significant, for lack of a better word, it really depends on how many bells and whistles they want," Trell said.Trell said AEG would not advance money without the artist requesting it. Trell said it's not only typical and customary, but standard and artist needs to secure either non-appearance or cancellation insurance. Their interest in the policy, Trell said, was to cover the advances and production costs incurred with the production of the show. "If the were no obligations to AEG, the payout would go back to the artist", Trell explained, "It just recoups our loan made to the artist."Trell was also asked about elements of tour insurance policies and an agreement with former manager Tohme Tohme. Jackson's contract called for him to represent to AEG that he didn't have any health conditions that would keep him from performing. Contract: Artistco hereby represents and warrants that artist does not possess any known health conditions, injuries or ailments that would reasonable be expected to interfere with Artist's first class performance at each of the shows during the termOh Tohme's $100k per month agreement, Trell was shown a January contract that Jackson signed to pay that amount. However, Trell said Tohme's agreement was predicated on Jackson getting tour cancellation insurance by a certain date. Deadline passed and by that point Tohme was no longer Jackson's manager, so he wasn't entitled to be paid his monthly fee. January 24, 2009 -- agreement entered with Dr. Tohme Tohme. Trell said Michael was involved and signed this agreement. "This agreement was entered into January 26, Trell testified. "There are conditions that needed to be met before any payment could be made."One of the the conditions was placement of non-appearance insurance, Trell said. That placement was done in late April, early May. In May, AEG received letter from MJ saying Tohme didn't rep him anymore. "No payments were ever made under this agreement," Trell explained.Court Transcript Rebbie Jackson attending court https://preview.redd.it/mmatrsug5o1d1.jpg?width=443&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b2bb18c8e5e6bca215719208409346bccaf96bc4 https://preview.redd.it/h6ywhnug5o1d1.jpg?width=443&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4576d97371141a308ad6300fb33400f28ed009e3 https://preview.redd.it/wd14srug5o1d1.jpg?width=508&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=31ded1abac7f1916fc67b5d0b264dd231b96f275 https://preview.redd.it/pvrb3vug5o1d1.jpg?width=423&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2e4e93a20eccf030747d4ee60a95365b5e41e9ce https://preview.redd.it/yexbwrug5o1d1.jpg?width=419&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c26155b8478e7c48f8863d946b836f1ab2a13fe8 https://preview.redd.it/o6nzk0vg5o1d1.jpg?width=483&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f146baaaa738ec5fe700fa42aaf58e138f21165f https://preview.redd.it/vuozioug5o1d1.jpg?width=431&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f229517cb96a8f80571439f6f0e27f8c6c7852bc |
2024.05.21 14:17 Irrane Can we share non-daily pass completed comics with each other?
2024.05.21 06:11 Bitter-Anteater5233 Life gave me a few lemons this week.
2024.05.21 02:51 xBadAppIex Chapter 7 - Private Student Loan
2024.05.20 22:40 Parking_Baker_6619 Red Lobster
2024.05.20 19:53 ClownNoire Questions on attorney referral pending and bankruptcy
2024.05.20 19:36 randomredhead10 Looking for input on what to do about a debt I am not able to pay, and the legal advice I have already received…
2024.05.20 02:58 idrownedmyfish77 [CO, US] Do I have a case to file for full custody?
2024.05.20 00:07 Late-Law7437 Child Support and paternity fraud
2024.05.19 20:45 FelicitySmoak_ Do you think there's a connection between Michael's death & his attorney Peter Lopez's "suicide"?
On June 25, 2009, Michael Jackson dies, reportedly of a Propofol overdose submitted by FelicitySmoak_ to MJDeathInvestigation [link] [comments] Three deaths of people connected to Michael happen within a six month period & I begin to think this was not a coincidence.
NO ONE, not his mother nor his family and friends, saw any sign that Peter Lopez would commit suicide. Reports surfaced that said Lopez seemed slightly stressed, but not one sign that morning Peter dropped the kids off at school at about 9:00 AM Friday. When he got home, he apparently went to the backyard garden and shot himself in the head There were reports from people close to Peter that thought he seemed "stressed out" in the weeks leading up to his death ... but that he did not tell anyone -- including his family -- what was bothering him. They did find a 1-page, handwritten note in which Peter expressed his love for his wife & kids and asked for forgiveness, but did not even hint at why Peter would end his life In the very odd 911 call that his wife, actress Catherine Bach made, she states that there was a "terrible robbery" a few days earlier I wonder what was stolen? Is the robbery connected? https://preview.redd.it/i11oo7tqhf1d1.jpg?width=485&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=08064dcc10707b306aced4de65b9756339e07932 Peter's History With MichaelRaymone Bain, Michael's former general manager, said she hired Peter Lopez in 2006 as Jackson's entertainment attorney when she was reorganizing his business affairs."I'd known Peter for 20 years," she said. When she was searching for a new legal team she said another of her clients, R&B singer Babyface, recommended Lopez. "I can't think of a nicer individual," she said after his death. "He was a good guy. I'm just so shocked."Lopez was conveniently/coincidentally hired to replace John Branca. On August 7, 2006, Raymone Bain stated that: "in what could be one of the biggest conspiracies in the entertainment industry, documents have been sent to Michael Jackson, and his representatives, which reveal a deliberate plan by some former attorneys as well as associates and advisors, to force Jackson into involuntary bankruptcy. The documents reveal that FORMER ATTORNEYS actively solicited other attorneys, vendors and creditors to 'join in a petition to place the client in involuntary bankruptcy.' ...Based on the timing of the events that have impacted his personal and professional life in recent years, he has long been suspicious that some of them that he entrusted to act on his behalf, and to advise him with respect to his personal and business affairs, may not have always acted in his best interests."John Branca was fired by Michael Jackson in 2006. Although Branca stated that he left because Michael was surrounded by people who he did not care for or trust, the fact is that that Michael Jackson fired Branca and wrote him a letter demanding that he return all documents that pertained to him. https://preview.redd.it/m0nczzp07f1d1.jpg?width=642&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a973ae4098ad803623619d397de3700b28764881 Michael's letter was dated in 2003. Did Jackson finally have the evidence against John Branca that he needed? And to be sure, Lopez was aware of all that was going on regarding Michael Jackson, whether it was Branca or other seedy characters that surrounded him. The Final MonthsSome people say Lopez wasn't involved with Michael in his final months. They are wrong. He was integral in the putting together of the This Is It residency, as confirmed by his wife & othersDarius Jordi Lassus, President and CEO of IMC Records said: "in the past three years, Peter Lopez helped Michael Jackson launch the Life Water "Thrillicious" Super Bowl ad featuring Naomi Campbell, the release of "Thriller 25" (the 25th Anniversary edition of the biggest selling album in music history with new mixes featuring Wil.i.am, Kanye West, Akon and Fergie), "Thriller the Musical", the "This Is It" tour with AEG and an MJ inspired clothing line with Christian Audigier, you simply couldn't stop them, they were on fire."On February 27, 2009, he is seen in Michael's entourage https://reddit.com/link/1cvv7k3/video/7f6ceop3df1d1/player On March 4, 2009, Lopez signed this "Confidential Estate Planning' document https://preview.redd.it/gzru3t8yaf1d1.jpg?width=2544&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4a5ee8d0b0568550c18e6fea27a008cea4078cf0 https://preview.redd.it/tj5bwlg0bf1d1.jpg?width=2550&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5bbdf3d43f83fc7eda70dbbed63196b674bfc155 https://preview.redd.it/w38n5lk2bf1d1.jpg?width=2550&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c323f35b00532b9926eab6172af1aa00f8d8e79b In April of 2009, Peter Lopez was fired. The reason & by whom is unknown, though it is widely believed to have been by Tohme Tohme It is said that he was fired to make room for John Branca to come back. Reportedly, on June 17th, eight days before he died, Michael signed a letter hiring Branca back as his lawyer. This letter has never been made public Howard Weitzman, a lawyer for the estate, confirmed: "In mid-June, Michael Jackson retained John Branca to represent him as general and entertainment counsel in his business and personal affairs."We all know about Michael's fraudulent 2002 will that Branca has passed off as authentic but it is said that Lopez was in possession of the legitimate 1997 will Picture taken May 23, 2008 https://preview.redd.it/55f8icmf8f1d1.png?width=541&format=png&auto=webp&s=0274a7b04ce4520c6ba15aa7c87e790bd5c8dee3 Yes, I know Keya Morgan is not completely trustworthy or a good person but I still don't think we should outright dismiss everything that he says In this August 2009 interview with Lopez, he says that the Michael Jackson investigation was to be solved "very soon". He seems like a man that knows more than he was letting on https://reddit.com/link/1cvv7k3/video/rwsjdbpnaf1d1/player Bach told the police that in the days prior to Peter's "suicide", she was being stalked. In 2012, when asked if she thought that maybe it was not suicide, or that something other than personal issues was behind his death she said "I don't know"In a 2013 interview with The Huffington Post, Catherine Bach states: "He represented Michael Jackson, and you know how crazy that was. He's the man responsible for putting the "This Is It" tour together. He brought AEG into the picture which I'm sure now he wishes he didn't. So I think that he felt very responsible for what happened to Michael. And I think that that gave him a lot of grief"This all seems a lot to just be coincidence Was someone threatening Peter's family because of what he knew about Michael's business? Peter was openly critical about the way the estate was handling MJ's business after his death. He said they (the estate) did not know what they were doing. Did Peter sacrifice himself to save his family from threats? Did he take himself out of the equation because he knew the info he was sitting on and other people knew that he knew? Peter would likely have known or have been in possession of it, if there was another will If Peter knew that people had conspired to kill Michael then he would also know that they would have no problem getting rid of him or his family too Why does Branca seem to be involved in every facet of this? |
2024.05.19 18:24 1199RT Was this all a honey pot for 3 letters to investigate the consulting group/short seller cellarbox grift in bankruptcy court?
submitted by 1199RT to Teddy [link] [comments] |
2024.05.19 02:24 LibraryGullible4679 Sibling is facing foreclosure, frustrating circumstances... how should I help?
2024.05.19 02:24 Infamous_Regret3583 Need help. Can medical bills be added to chapter 13 if insurance company is demanding provider to pay back overpayments dated before the filing date?
2024.05.18 23:01 nopainnorogaine Seeking Advice on Managing Over $20,000 in Debt While on Social Assistance Due to Mental Health/Addiction Issues
2024.05.18 17:43 Bonnaroo_Jon Voyager Digital Pursues Clawbacks Against Customers With Net Transfers Of $350,000+ Within 90 Days Of Bankruptcy
submitted by Bonnaroo_Jon to Invest_Voyager [link] [comments] |
2024.05.18 16:53 Bonnaroo_Jon VOYAGER DIGITAL PURSUES CLAWBACKS AGAINST CUSTOMERS WITH NET TRANSFERS OF $350,000+ WITHIN 90 DAYS OF BANKRUPTCY!
2024.05.18 14:42 Late-Law7437 Child Support and paternity fraud
2024.05.18 00:22 ghoullig IRS thinks I owe on gains that never happened.
2024.05.17 20:07 tareekpetareek Manpasand was an accounting fraud with beverages on the side
Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/manpasand-an-accounting-fraud (my newsletter Boring Money. Do visit the original link and subscribe if you'd like to receive similar posts directly in your inbox) submitted by tareekpetareek to u/tareekpetareek [link] [comments] Let’s say you’re a company that wants to commit an elaborate fraud. What is the most egregious fraud that you can think of? Maybe let’s not start with egregious. Let’s start with something simple! Here’s something that’s reasonably common:
Now let’s go egregious:
Here’s a SEBI order from late in April about Manpasand Beverages. Manpasand used to be a beverages company based in Gujarat. In 2019 the company shut down because it got caught in a bunch of frauds. It’s only now that SEBI published the details of what was happening. Probably best summarised by fund manager Amit Mantri: [1] https://preview.redd.it/o85shr8p3y0d1.jpg?width=603&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=26ace208d28eae2bb2401449f9b1dcc6bd1eefd0 Fake it till you make it (or don’t)Manpasand faked its revenue (of course). It also faked its expenses, customers, vendors, tax liabilities, etc. How did it get away with doing this stuff? I don’t know, someone’s gotta ask Deloitte. They were Manpasand’s auditor for eight years, resigning only in 2018. The company’s fraud came out officially in 2019—Deloitte, whose job was to make sure the books were right and also had access to all the inside information, figured that something was off only a year earlier!Anyway, SEBI appointed its own auditor to figure out what was wrong with Manpasand’s accounts and the auditor came back with a bunch of stuff. [2] Here’s the bit about Manpasand inflating its revenue. From SEBI’s order: … CGST vide letter dated July 07, 2019, inter alia, informed that Manpasand had shown inflated sales figure in its balance sheet by way of receipt/ supply of fake invoices without actual receipt/ supply of goods. It was further informed in the said letter that Manpasand had floated 38 bogus/paper firms to inflate its turnover and that inward and outward transactions made with such bogus firms amount to Rs.188.48 Crore and Rs. 691.30 Crore, respectively.Manpasand created 38 different companies and it both “sold” its products to those companies as well as “bought” stuff from some of them. Basically, Manpasand created real companies to play the role of its customers and vendors. … it was observed that the parties with whom transactions amounting to Rs.29.84 Crore were entered into, were not registered for dealing in the said goods/products being manufactured by the Company. Further, there was non-receipt of sale considerations and debtors balance were adjusted by passing journal entriesManpasand was a beverages company that was selling stuff to its customers. Traditionally a company like Manpasand might have distributors as customers but Manpasand’s customers were registered as something else entirely (I do wonder what, the order doesn’t mention it). These are fake customers that Manpasand created out of thin air. Establishing companies is quite a bit of effort! Why half-ass the part where you select the “business type”? I sort of understand though. I’ve done it too. Put so much effort into something that you’re bored by the end that you muck it up. I’m kidding! The real reason is probably that Manpasand wouldn’t have actually created these fake companies itself. There would be a middleman who would have them made in advance, all ready to go whenever needed to do fraud. Manpasand propped up its sales as well as its expenses by pretty much just funnelling money around from one entity to the other. In some instances, it wouldn’t even move real money around. It would just note down that it had to pay one company, and had to also collect payments from another company, and then cancel each other out. Manpasand was running its accounts on Splitwise. In general, there is nothing wrong with a company having such set-off arrangements. If you know your creditor owes money to your debtor, sure, cancel those transactions out. But how likely is it that a company’s suppliers and distributors know each other? And transact with each other? This post is public so feel free to share it. All except death and taxesIf you’re planning to do some accounting fraud, here’s something to keep in mind. I mean, I’m not not recommending that you do fraud, but if you do have your mind made up I might as well pass this along. Fake your sales, that’s fine. Fake your expenses, that’s fine too. But don’t fake your taxes, those guys will come after you.In 2019 right before Manpasand shut down, GST officials raided its offices and arrested the CEO, CFO and a director. If you think about it, one of the reasons Manpasand got away with its fraud for as long as it did was that its accounts looked reasonably realistic. Deloitte made sure of that! Manpasand didn’t just arbitrarily put in fake numbers, oh no. It showed transactions to back them up with actual companies. But any sales or purchases bring with it a cute goods and services tax, and the GST folks don’t care all that much about the fact that your sales are real. They’d like their share anyway. And not the GST you owe them, but because of how GST works, they would also want the GST your vendors (and your vendors’ vendors) might owe them. GST has this magical thing called “input tax credit” which is basically the GST council giving you magic points every time you pay GST as a customer. Say, you buy some glass to make some marbles. You pay GST when you buy that glass, and you get some magic points. When you sell your freshly manufactured marbles, you collect GST from your customers and can redeem those magic points which you got earlier to reduce the GST you actually pay. (This isn’t tax advice so don’t come after me if you mess up your taxes because of anything you read here.) These points are nice because they help save tax. But a basic requirement to use these points is that the company you bought your glass from has to have paid their fair share of GST in the first place! You only get the points if they’ve paid their tax! In Manpasand’s case the vendors it was dealing with existed solely for the purpose of enabling accounting fraud. Of course they weren’t going to be paying any tax. And yet Manpasand was claiming the magic points and reducing the GST it paid. These fake magic points is how the GST people figured out that there was something very wrong happening. If the GST raid hadn’t happened, would Manpasand have survived as a company? Absolutely not. But would it have survived longer than it did? Probably. Roll over, it’s a takeoverThings have already been a bit bizarre but what follows next is absolutely basket case. Here’s a section of Manpasand’s response to SEBI. From SEBI’s order:The Company is a victim of a pre-planned, fraudulent scheme and conspiracy perpetrated by Finquest Financial Solutions Pvt Ltd (FINQUEST) wherein under the garb of promise to provide working capital worth Rs.100 Crores, six documents were executed by and between MBL & FINQUEST. Within a span of two and a half months, it was clear that this entire so called transaction of providing working capital loan was nothing but a mere play to gain the entire control of MBL which is having asset base of around Rs.625 Crores…Finquest is an NBFC that lent money to Manpasand right after the GST raid happened and its officials were all in jail. Manpasand is claiming that Finquest’s goal wasn’t to just lend to the company and earn an interest income out of it, but to take over the company itself. Manpasand claims that Finquest defrauded it and even calls whatever they did a “hostile takeover”. Let’s humour this idea for a bit. If you’re a listed company worried about a hostile takeover, you’d look at who’s buying your stock. That’s the normal way for hostile takeovers to work. You wake up one day to realise that Elon owns 9% of your and immediately fall into a state of panic. If you don’t own enough of your company, Elon just might. Another hostile takeover could be by a distressed debt investor. You may have taken a loan from some banks or whoever some time back. The banks would’ve sold your loans to outside investors. But then because you’re in tough times, the investors would want to rid themselves of your loans at a discount. This distressed debt is then caught by investors trained in the art of recovering dollars from pennies. If you can’t repay your loans to these guys, they would be more than happy to squeeze it out of you. This is what happened with Byju’s US unit. But really, hostile takeovers aren’t common with distressed debt investors. They don’t want to run your company! They want their money back with some (a lot) of interest. [3] Finquest lent to Manpasand, it didn’t buy its stock. So maybe this was the second kind of hostile takeover, the distressed debt kind? Well, here’s Abhishek Singh, then director of Manpasand in an interview with Business Today back in 2019: Business Today: Dhirendra Singh [the CEO] has accused Finquest of a hostile takeover bid, while Finquest claims that it was always mentioned in the term-sheet that the company will be managed by a professional team until its money was parked with you. It will be nice to get your side of the story.Singh: Whatever amount has been transferred by the Finquest in the bank account of MBL was done in the new account opened by FFSPL's representatives in the name of MBL. The control of this new bank account lies with FFSPL's representatives. FFSPL was allowed operational access to business of MBL and not financial access, as per the term sheet dated July 3, 2019. …As per the term sheet dated July 3, 2019, FFSPL had right to nominate two directors on the Board of Directors of MBL, which shall constitute minimum one-third strength of the Board. Pursuant to this clause, FFSPL appointed three directors instead of two. The total strength of the board became six directors, one-third of this comes to two. Thus, one more director being a nominee of FFSPL was appointed. … What? Manpasand borrowed money from Finquest but the bank account where the money came in was controlled by Finquest? And Finquest got “operational access” (whatever that means) as well as a third of Manpasand’s board seats? This isn’t a hostile takeover! It’s a lamblike takeover. Honestly, I get it. Manpasand’s CEO and others were in jail. The company needed money. The only lender willing to lend to a shady company whose executives are in jail would be a shady lender. And that shady lender was Finquest—which, by the way, had done something similar before—but Manpasand took what it got. If there’s a second “don’t do this if you’re doing fraud” lesson in this, it’s this. Don’t borrow from a loan shark! Footnotes [1] A nice factoid is that Amit Mantri was the first to point out that Manpasand was manipulating its numbers all the way back in 2016. They did some really good on-ground research! [2] The auditor that SEBI assigned to do this, Chokshi & Chokshi, came back with 12 findings from Manpasand’s accounts. But I think I found a couple of mistakes? It wouldn’t in any way affect SEBI’s conclusion on Manpasand, but I find it funny that a story which is essentially about an auditor’s massive failure to do its job also has an auditor that probably wasn’t too careful themselves? I’ll probably write about this in a future post. [3] A distressed debt investor would prefer to take over a company to be able to put it into bankruptcy so that it can sell the company’s assets and recover its money. That’s very different from what the kind of takeover that Elon did of Twitter. Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/manpasand-an-accounting-fraud |
2024.05.17 20:05 tareekpetareek For finance enthusiasts here: Manpasand was an accounting fraud with beverages on the side
Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/manpasand-an-accounting-fraud (my newsletter Boring Money. Do visit the original link and subscribe if you'd like to receive similar posts directly in your inbox) submitted by tareekpetareek to unitedstatesofindia [link] [comments] Let’s say you’re a company that wants to commit an elaborate fraud. What is the most egregious fraud that you can think of? Maybe let’s not start with egregious. Let’s start with something simple! Here’s something that’s reasonably common:
Now let’s go egregious:
Here’s a SEBI order from late in April about Manpasand Beverages. Manpasand used to be a beverages company based in Gujarat. In 2019 the company shut down because it got caught in a bunch of frauds. It’s only now that SEBI published the details of what was happening. Probably best summarised by fund manager Amit Mantri: [1] https://preview.redd.it/o85shr8p3y0d1.jpg?width=603&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=26ace208d28eae2bb2401449f9b1dcc6bd1eefd0 Fake it till you make it (or don’t)Manpasand faked its revenue (of course). It also faked its expenses, customers, vendors, tax liabilities, etc. How did it get away with doing this stuff? I don’t know, someone’s gotta ask Deloitte. They were Manpasand’s auditor for eight years, resigning only in 2018. The company’s fraud came out officially in 2019—Deloitte, whose job was to make sure the books were right and also had access to all the inside information, figured that something was off only a year earlier!Anyway, SEBI appointed its own auditor to figure out what was wrong with Manpasand’s accounts and the auditor came back with a bunch of stuff. [2] Here’s the bit about Manpasand inflating its revenue. From SEBI’s order: … CGST vide letter dated July 07, 2019, inter alia, informed that Manpasand had shown inflated sales figure in its balance sheet by way of receipt/ supply of fake invoices without actual receipt/ supply of goods. It was further informed in the said letter that Manpasand had floated 38 bogus/paper firms to inflate its turnover and that inward and outward transactions made with such bogus firms amount to Rs.188.48 Crore and Rs. 691.30 Crore, respectively.Manpasand created 38 different companies and it both “sold” its products to those companies as well as “bought” stuff from some of them. Basically, Manpasand created real companies to play the role of its customers and vendors. … it was observed that the parties with whom transactions amounting to Rs.29.84 Crore were entered into, were not registered for dealing in the said goods/products being manufactured by the Company. Further, there was non-receipt of sale considerations and debtors balance were adjusted by passing journal entriesManpasand was a beverages company that was selling stuff to its customers. Traditionally a company like Manpasand might have distributors as customers but Manpasand’s customers were registered as something else entirely (I do wonder what, the order doesn’t mention it). These are fake customers that Manpasand created out of thin air. Establishing companies is quite a bit of effort! Why half-ass the part where you select the “business type”? I sort of understand though. I’ve done it too. Put so much effort into something that you’re bored by the end that you muck it up. I’m kidding! The real reason is probably that Manpasand wouldn’t have actually created these fake companies itself. There would be a middleman who would have them made in advance, all ready to go whenever needed to do fraud. Manpasand propped up its sales as well as its expenses by pretty much just funnelling money around from one entity to the other. In some instances, it wouldn’t even move real money around. It would just note down that it had to pay one company, and had to also collect payments from another company, and then cancel each other out. Manpasand was running its accounts on Splitwise. In general, there is nothing wrong with a company having such set-off arrangements. If you know your creditor owes money to your debtor, sure, cancel those transactions out. But how likely is it that a company’s suppliers and distributors know each other? And transact with each other? This post is public so feel free to share it. All except death and taxesIf you’re planning to do some accounting fraud, here’s something to keep in mind. I mean, I’m not not recommending that you do fraud, but if you do have your mind made up I might as well pass this along. Fake your sales, that’s fine. Fake your expenses, that’s fine too. But don’t fake your taxes, those guys will come after you.In 2019 right before Manpasand shut down, GST officials raided its offices and arrested the CEO, CFO and a director. If you think about it, one of the reasons Manpasand got away with its fraud for as long as it did was that its accounts looked reasonably realistic. Deloitte made sure of that! Manpasand didn’t just arbitrarily put in fake numbers, oh no. It showed transactions to back them up with actual companies. But any sales or purchases bring with it a cute goods and services tax, and the GST folks don’t care all that much about the fact that your sales are real. They’d like their share anyway. And not the GST you owe them, but because of how GST works, they would also want the GST your vendors (and your vendors’ vendors) might owe them. GST has this magical thing called “input tax credit” which is basically the GST council giving you magic points every time you pay GST as a customer. Say, you buy some glass to make some marbles. You pay GST when you buy that glass, and you get some magic points. When you sell your freshly manufactured marbles, you collect GST from your customers and can redeem those magic points which you got earlier to reduce the GST you actually pay. (This isn’t tax advice so don’t come after me if you mess up your taxes because of anything you read here.) These points are nice because they help save tax. But a basic requirement to use these points is that the company you bought your glass from has to have paid their fair share of GST in the first place! You only get the points if they’ve paid their tax! In Manpasand’s case the vendors it was dealing with existed solely for the purpose of enabling accounting fraud. Of course they weren’t going to be paying any tax. And yet Manpasand was claiming the magic points and reducing the GST it paid. These fake magic points is how the GST people figured out that there was something very wrong happening. If the GST raid hadn’t happened, would Manpasand have survived as a company? Absolutely not. But would it have survived longer than it did? Probably. Roll over, it’s a takeoverThings have already been a bit bizarre but what follows next is absolutely basket case. Here’s a section of Manpasand’s response to SEBI. From SEBI’s order:The Company is a victim of a pre-planned, fraudulent scheme and conspiracy perpetrated by Finquest Financial Solutions Pvt Ltd (FINQUEST) wherein under the garb of promise to provide working capital worth Rs.100 Crores, six documents were executed by and between MBL & FINQUEST. Within a span of two and a half months, it was clear that this entire so called transaction of providing working capital loan was nothing but a mere play to gain the entire control of MBL which is having asset base of around Rs.625 Crores…Finquest is an NBFC that lent money to Manpasand right after the GST raid happened and its officials were all in jail. Manpasand is claiming that Finquest’s goal wasn’t to just lend to the company and earn an interest income out of it, but to take over the company itself. Manpasand claims that Finquest defrauded it and even calls whatever they did a “hostile takeover”. Let’s humour this idea for a bit. If you’re a listed company worried about a hostile takeover, you’d look at who’s buying your stock. That’s the normal way for hostile takeovers to work. You wake up one day to realise that Elon owns 9% of your and immediately fall into a state of panic. If you don’t own enough of your company, Elon just might. Another hostile takeover could be by a distressed debt investor. You may have taken a loan from some banks or whoever some time back. The banks would’ve sold your loans to outside investors. But then because you’re in tough times, the investors would want to rid themselves of your loans at a discount. This distressed debt is then caught by investors trained in the art of recovering dollars from pennies. If you can’t repay your loans to these guys, they would be more than happy to squeeze it out of you. This is what happened with Byju’s US unit. But really, hostile takeovers aren’t common with distressed debt investors. They don’t want to run your company! They want their money back with some (a lot) of interest. [3] Finquest lent to Manpasand, it didn’t buy its stock. So maybe this was the second kind of hostile takeover, the distressed debt kind? Well, here’s Abhishek Singh, then director of Manpasand in an interview with Business Today back in 2019: Business Today: Dhirendra Singh [the CEO] has accused Finquest of a hostile takeover bid, while Finquest claims that it was always mentioned in the term-sheet that the company will be managed by a professional team until its money was parked with you. It will be nice to get your side of the story.Singh: Whatever amount has been transferred by the Finquest in the bank account of MBL was done in the new account opened by FFSPL's representatives in the name of MBL. The control of this new bank account lies with FFSPL's representatives. FFSPL was allowed operational access to business of MBL and not financial access, as per the term sheet dated July 3, 2019. …As per the term sheet dated July 3, 2019, FFSPL had right to nominate two directors on the Board of Directors of MBL, which shall constitute minimum one-third strength of the Board. Pursuant to this clause, FFSPL appointed three directors instead of two. The total strength of the board became six directors, one-third of this comes to two. Thus, one more director being a nominee of FFSPL was appointed. … What? Manpasand borrowed money from Finquest but the bank account where the money came in was controlled by Finquest? And Finquest got “operational access” (whatever that means) as well as a third of Manpasand’s board seats? This isn’t a hostile takeover! It’s a lamblike takeover. Honestly, I get it. Manpasand’s CEO and others were in jail. The company needed money. The only lender willing to lend to a shady company whose executives are in jail would be a shady lender. And that shady lender was Finquest—which, by the way, had done something similar before—but Manpasand took what it got. If there’s a second “don’t do this if you’re doing fraud” lesson in this, it’s this. Don’t borrow from a loan shark! Footnotes [1] A nice factoid is that Amit Mantri was the first to point out that Manpasand was manipulating its numbers all the way back in 2016. They did some really good on-ground research! [2] The auditor that SEBI assigned to do this, Chokshi & Chokshi, came back with 12 findings from Manpasand’s accounts. But I think I found a couple of mistakes? It wouldn’t in any way affect SEBI’s conclusion on Manpasand, but I find it funny that a story which is essentially about an auditor’s massive failure to do its job also has an auditor that probably wasn’t too careful themselves? I’ll probably write about this in a future post. [3] A distressed debt investor would prefer to take over a company to be able to put it into bankruptcy so that it can sell the company’s assets and recover its money. That’s very different from what the kind of takeover that Elon did of Twitter. Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/manpasand-an-accounting-fraud |