Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 7 votes

Steinhoff


  • Please log in to reply
15225 replies to this topic

#9701 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,941 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:49 PM

From:

https://www.veb.net/...n-aansprakelijk

 

"

...

Denied earlier rumors for a long time

The first rumors of irregularities appeared in August 2017. On August 24, 2017, Steinhoff resolutely rejected these rumors about a possible fraud:

“The company rejects the allegations of dishonesty contained in the statements. In particular substantial facts and allegation are wrong or misleading ”

Steinhoff announced on December 4 that the financial statements would be published on December 6, 2017. The company stated that the (forensic) investigations had not provided any additional information.

...

"

Yes very interesting and the Chairman was still very happy!!!!


  • 0

#9702 Tom

Tom

    Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 767 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:46 PM

From:

https://www.veb.net/...n-aansprakelijk

 

"

...

Denied earlier rumors for a long time

The first rumors of irregularities appeared in August 2017. On August 24, 2017, Steinhoff resolutely rejected these rumors about a possible fraud:

“The company rejects the allegations of dishonesty contained in the statements. In particular substantial facts and allegation are wrong or misleading ”

Steinhoff announced on December 4 that the financial statements would be published on December 6, 2017. The company stated that the (forensic) investigations had not provided any additional information.

...

"


Edited by Tom, 26 March 2019 - 12:47 PM.

  • 0

#9703 Polly

Polly

    The Oracle

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,401 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:32 PM


 Where if u invest ur money, u cannot turn to the courts to get it back. 

agree with that 100%....dont think investors , fund managers stand a chance with that..Wieses case is different....


  • 0

Trading is one of the only fields where genuine con artists/scammers will urge you to “be careful of con artists/scammers.”


#9704 Polly

Polly

    The Oracle

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,401 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:17 PM

Quotation:

“A business built on fraud, cannot last.”

Especially a pyramid scheme!!!


  • 0

Trading is one of the only fields where genuine con artists/scammers will urge you to “be careful of con artists/scammers.”


#9705 Tom

Tom

    Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 767 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:06 PM

https://m.fin24.com/...-case-20190326?

Interesting, wrt ayo and pic, high Court went in ayo's favour.

Can this be somewhat viewed in the same light as steinhoff... Where if u invest ur money, u cannot turn to the courts to get it back. With steinhoff the main issue is fraud, I do not get the sense that ayo committed fraud, sounds more like corruption there..... So fraud and corruption separate issues?

 

It's the opinion of the court that the CIPC doesn't have the authorization to issue such money recovery order.
 
However the the Commission of Inquiries is still invitsigatin the PIC, and should eventually submit a report to the president, Parliament and courts.

 

"

The CIPC is responsible for the following functions:

  • Registration of Companies, Co-operatives and Intellectual Property Rights (trademarks, patents, designs and copyright) and maintenance thereof
  • To disclose Information on its business registers
  • To promote education and awareness of Company and Intellectual Property Law
  • To promote compliance with relevant legislation
  • Efficiently and effectively enforce relevant legislation
  • Monitor compliance with, and contraventions of financial reporting standards, and make recommendations thereto to Financial Reporting Standards Council (FRSC)
  • Licensing of Business rescue practitioners
  • Report, research and advise the Minister on matters of national policy relating to company and intellectual property law.

"


Edited by Tom, 26 March 2019 - 12:07 PM.

  • 0

#9706 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,941 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 12:01 PM

Hi DTD,

 

See my post to Matrix.

 

My view is that the E6.5b income overstatement is separate and distinct to the impairments.  While both are negative events and destroy shareholder value, the former (overstatement of income) is an Income Statement matter that will eventually be corrected for prior years in the Statement of Changes in Equity.

 

Overstatements generally may or may not necessarily lead to impairments of Goodwill and Intangible assets on the Balance sheet (although they mostly do in fraud cases).

 

If I have this correct, and hopefully Matrix responds, my point is that most of the correction of the revenue has been adjusted, and almost all of the impairments have been effected.

 

Best Regards

Captainfrom82

 

Hi Captain,

 

Thank you very much.

 

My understanding looking at the restatements in Note 17 of the account 31 March 2018 I see the following:

 
Page 83  - 31 March 2018 accounts
 
17.7 Other
Included in other restatements:
• Inflated income which has resulted in both operating profit and assets being overstated;
• Incorrect application of group accounting principles in the light of new factors;
• Disposition of assets without appropriate security, leading to concern regarding recoverability of
these assets;
• Incorrect classification of assets and liabilities;
• A reduction in treasury shares and dilutive instruments becoming anti-dilutive due to an operating
loss attributable to ordinary shareholders during the period; and
• Reclassification of non-current liabilities to current as a result of the impact of other restatements on debt covenants
 
In pages 76-77 Income statement – Restated 31 March 2017
 
Profit/(loss) for the period  - (941)
 
In pages 74-75 Balance Sheet – Restated 31 March 2017
 
Total Assets – (7229)
Liabilities = (335)   got this from liabilities – equity
 
Therefore total impairments to note 17.7 Other is (8495) 
 
So does this mean that enough impairments done?
 
Your comments appreciated.
 
Best Regards,
DTD

Edited by DayTraderDad, 26 March 2019 - 12:02 PM.

  • 0

#9707 Lionelza1

Lionelza1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,987 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 11:25 AM

https://m.fin24.com/...-case-20190326?

Interesting, wrt ayo and pic, high Court went in ayo's favour.

Can this be somewhat viewed in the same light as steinhoff... Where if u invest ur money, u cannot turn to the courts to get it back. With steinhoff the main issue is fraud, I do not get the sense that ayo committed fraud, sounds more like corruption there..... So fraud and corruption separate issues?
  • 0

#9708 Tom

Tom

    Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 767 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 11:16 AM

Quotation:

“A business built on fraud, cannot last.”


  • 0

#9709 Tom

Tom

    Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 767 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 11:11 AM

https://www.moneyweb...ments-with-eoh/


  • 0

#9710 Captainfrom82

Captainfrom82

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 321 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 07:01 AM

Hi Captain,

 

Many thanks yes that true but I was referring to the comment the CEO made when in the parliament is words were something like this" the report identified 6.5 bil but we have impaired 11 bil"

 

I am just wondering if SNH did not by change actually impaired more then necessary/required.

What do you think is it be possible such scenario?

 

Hi DTD,

 

See my post to Matrix.

 

My view is that the E6.5b income overstatement is separate and distinct to the impairments.  While both are negative events and destroy shareholder value, the former (overstatement of income) is an Income Statement matter that will eventually be corrected for prior years in the Statement of Changes in Equity.

 

Overstatements generally may or may not necessarily lead to impairments of Goodwill and Intangible assets on the Balance sheet (although they mostly do in fraud cases).

 

If I have this correct, and hopefully Matrix responds, my point is that most of the correction of the revenue has been adjusted, and almost all of the impairments have been effected.

 

Best Regards

Captainfrom82


  • 0

#9711 Captainfrom82

Captainfrom82

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 321 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 06:33 AM

In Accounting you do not reissue AFS for prior years if errors are found.

The cumulative effect of the error is disclosed in the Opening Balance of the prior period.

The total estimate of revenue overstatement as identified by PWC did indicate the effect of overstatement on each of the 7 years, and then the total effect thereof.

Therefor it would add no value in re-issuing the older AFS.

Correcting the 2017 AFS will take the cumulative effect into consideration.

 

Du Preez also mentioned that the effect of the errors will be disclosed in the 2016/2017 AFS.

Not everyone on here understood that and thought it to be obvious that the AFS will disclose it.

What he meant by this is that in the 2017 AFS you would have a correction of Error note that indicates:

Prior amounts as report - Effect of error identified - Restated amount.

This will also include narrative explanations of the error and effect.

 

The 2017/8 AFS will not include the above Correction of Error as the comparative (2017) in that AFS will already be the corrected amounts.

So if they issue the 2017 and 2018 AFS on one day, i.e. 18 April, you have to look at the 2017 AFS to see the actual error and effect thereof.

2018 AFS will theoretically include non of this and just be the new amounts that we are taking forward.

 

Hi Matrix,

 

Thank you for the clarification.  It is a long time since I studied accounting. Ignoring the GAAP vs IFRS differences for a moment (thankfully they do not apply here).

 

The slight difference for Steinhoff is that the FY17 results have not been released.  In effect, therefore for FY17 there is no incorrect financials to correct.  The accountants will therefore correct FY16, and release the correct FY17 and FY18 financials.  Have I got this correct?

 

Just to clarify further, under IAS 8, as you correctly point out, the prior corrections  will reflect as a single line item in the Statement of Changes in Equity of the FY16 (as they have done for the 1H17 and 1H18 financials released on 28 June 2018).

 

IAS 8 does not require 2 years of comparison for Income Statements, Cashflow Statements - just current and the prior year.  However, the Balance sheet must have two prior comparisons.(the 1H and FY which Steinhoff has provided). 

 

Since the Balance Sheet and by associated are snapshots of the financial position as at a moment in time (as opposed to the accumulative nature of the Income Statement), all the prior shenanigans would be taken into account in the single line correction?  In the case of Steinhoff, the huge E10.1b restatements to the Reserves as reflected in the Statement of changes to equity have taken care of the prior periods overstatements.

 

Are you in agreement?

 

Best Regards

Captainfrom82


  • 0

#9712 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,941 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 08:54 PM

 

 That's the main word if you use and understand the DOTS!!!!!!!   What dots

 

See that 3000 page report...its written on toilet paper thats why no one can make a copy!! Wrong if you want a report leaked give it to the Hawks, Parliament etc.

 

And you know what its going to be used for dont u....  Yes I know its going to be used to show that your innocent diamond dealer was aware of what was going on

 

Zero out of three for you...Back to kinder garden ... Must be sleeping in class

 

Yes has you were complaining that I only look at one share guess what we going to be talking lots to each other including in your help desk. I am retires so have plenty of time!!!


  • 0

#9713 Polly

Polly

    The Oracle

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,401 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 08:40 PM

 That's the main word if you use and understand the DOTS!!!!!!!   What dots

 

See that 3000 page report...its written on toilet paper thats why no one can make a copy!! Wrong if you want a report leaked give it to the Hawks, Parliament etc.

 

And you know what its going to be used for dont u....  Yes I know its going to be used to show that your innocent diamond dealer was aware of what was going on

 

Zero out of three for you...Back to kinder garden ... Must be sleeping in class


Edited by Polly, 25 March 2019 - 08:40 PM.

  • 0

Trading is one of the only fields where genuine con artists/scammers will urge you to “be careful of con artists/scammers.”


#9714 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,941 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 08:28 PM

There you go Polly another one!!! https://www.business...iar-ring-to-it/ Brait’s executive bailout has familiar ring to it
  • 0

#9715 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,941 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 08:15 PM

 That's the main word if you use and understand the DOTS!!!!!!!   What dots

 

See that 3000 page report...its written on toilet paper thats why no one can make a copy!! Wrong if you want a report leaked give it to the Hawks, Parliament etc.

 

And you know what its going to be used for dont u.... :D Yes I know its going to be used to show that your innocent diamond dealer was aware of what was going on.

Just read your post and see exactly what you said? Absolutely nothing just vague statements.


  • 0

#9716 Midas1

Midas1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,307 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 07:54 PM

As i implied I have no axe grind..this is like golf we play against ourselves
  • 0

#9717 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,941 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 07:50 PM

Dont get me wrong all, if i felt could make quick buck here would go for it, but everytime ive gone cheap share land on my arse..when i buy quality with credentials i make money so rather stick to whats working for me..but as ive said before this ain't a competition so best luck everyone

Midas! my argument here is not about telling people to buy SNH because I personally don't care what people do its about the arrogance and disrespect for people.


  • 0

#9718 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,941 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 07:47 PM

 what time....thought last week you said you already won and we lost ???? :o  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:

 

you walking on eggshells as normal.... :)

Yes you and your Mini I's were advocating dooms day about the report going to be ugly yet indeed a victory was nothing new all about accountants playing the figures.

 

Yip I might be walking on eggshells and many other places hope it makes you feel big and great but at least I am not a vague arrogant bullsxxxter with a very big inferiority complex.


  • 0

#9719 Midas1

Midas1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,307 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 07:42 PM

Dont get me wrong all, if i felt could make quick buck here would go for it, but everytime ive gone cheap share land on my arse..when i buy quality with credentials i make money so rather stick to whats working for me..but as ive said before this ain't a competition so best luck everyone
  • 0

#9720 Polly

Polly

    The Oracle

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,401 posts

Posted 25 March 2019 - 07:20 PM

but don't worry your time will come.

 

 what time....thought last week you said you already won and we lost ???? :o  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:

 

you walking on eggshells as normal.... :)


  • 0

Trading is one of the only fields where genuine con artists/scammers will urge you to “be careful of con artists/scammers.”






Sponsored by Sharenet and VPSNine Linux VPS Hosting