OTCPK:TOUBF - Post by User
Comment by
whoa_rimcheeseon Jun 14, 2011 11:14am
210 Views
Post# 18712451
jameslast
jameslastI actually think that they did a fairly admirable job explaining the Authorized Intermediaries. This was requested by analysts and they did it. I believe they also shed some good light on how forestry in China differs than the US - and it was presented in a clear and understandable way. Sino was a first mover in this type of market and transaction of any scale, and now they are being punished for it. They also refuted further MW claims not discussed before, such as number of former E&Y partners on board. Not sure where Block got 5 from. For all the thousands of hours and pages of research, I noticed this yesterday with a simply look on the web page. Not really a huge deal, but still, odd to inflate to 5 with no basis.
Think of this from Chan's perspective - if you know the company is not fraudulent (an assumption for some here) - you have been wrongly accused, you have already issued some clear statements and evidence to refute the largest MW claims.....what more do you do without looking overly aggressive, repeating yourself, bringing even more attention to the claims, and really it all not mattering cause people want INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION. Hence, PwC's report is the biggest word on this - and with the scope of work being so huge - 2/3 months is the soonest. You have to be upfront, honest and tell people that. He did.
Why the hell should the committee set up to address the fraud claims start clammering about how innocent Sino is? What sense does that make? They are independent directors and have just hired an external firm to investigate....let the firm do its work and present substantiated findings. Directors won't look too independent if they are sitting on Chan's lap repeating everything he has said. The conference call was very positive - but most took it as negative. To each their own.