Skip to main content

Patrick Byrne, CEO of, Cannot Answer a Simple Question

On January 30, 2007, in a post (message # 4246) on, I asked the Board of Directors (including Patrick Byrne, who is a board member) of a simple question:

To The Board of Directors of

It is my understanding that is releasing an earnings report on February 5, 2007 and the company will file a report with the Securities and Exchange Commission on that date.

I respectfully submit the following questions:

Has the Board of Directors considered any additional disclosure relating to the SEC subpoena of

Note: Bold and italic print added by me.

Patrick Byrne and his henchman Judd Bagley (Director of Social Media at later responded with an array of personal attacks against me. Patrick Byrne complained about my questions openly on the message board for

For example, on February 2, 2007, in a post (message # 4463) on, under his alias Hannibal, Patrick Byrne wrote:

So let us get this straight: Sam, who seems not to understand that I let weeks or months go by without checking in on this board, and operating under some ill-founded assumption that he is Junior Prosecutor and is owed immediate and full answers from me to any questions he posts here, criticizes me for not answering his inane and repititive questions fully and immediately…..

Is there anyone here who suspects that Sam is just trying to clog, or waste my time, or misdirect this discussion board? If you agree, please recommend this post. If we get over 20, I say that is proof that it is time we all agree to ignore Sam forever.


Note: Despite Patrick Byrne's representation that he "let weeks or months go by without checking in on this board," Mr. Byrne has posted about twenty messages on in the previous three weeks. He had posted about a dozen messages in the previous seven days.

Eventually, I was booted off the by its administrator for asking Patrick Byrne and Judd Bagley “deposition style” questions. They sent me a personal message which stated:

However, we are putting our foot down on the misuse of our OSTK board for your own agenda, which, for whatever reason, seems to include clogging our forum to conduct an informal and unofficial campaign of "deposition-style" messages targeting other members of InvestorVillage.

On May 9, 2007, released its 10 – Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, which contained the following disclosure:

On May 9, 2006 the Company received a notice of an investigation and subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office. On May 17, 2006, Patrick Byrne also received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office. These subpoenas requested a broad range of documents, including, among other documents, all documents relating to the Company’s accounting policies, the Company’s targets, projections or estimates related to financial performance, the Company’s recent restatement of its financial statements, the filing of its complaint against Gradient Analytics, Inc., the development and implementation of certain new technology systems and disclosures of progress and problems with those systems, communications with and regarding investment analysts, communications regarding shareholders who did not receive the Company’s proxy statement in April 2006, communications with certain shareholders, and communications regarding short selling, naked short selling, purchases and sales of Company stock, obtaining paper certificates, and stock loan or borrow of Company shares. The Company and Mr. Byrne have responded to these subpoenas and each continues to cooperate with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this matter.

Note: Bold and italic print added by me.

The following disclosures were omitted from previous financial reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission by

On May 17, 2006, Patrick Byrne also received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office.


The Company and Mr. Byrne have responded to these subpoenas and each continues to cooperate with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this matter.

Patrick Byrne cannot seem to answer some simple questions such as:

Why did disclose his subpoena now after excluding this disclosure from previous SEC filings by the company?

Note: Bold and italic print added by me

We still do not know why delayed its disclosure of the subpoena that its CEO Patrick Byrne received from the Securities and Exchange Commission. We do not know why waited for almost a year to disclose Patrick Byrne's subpoena. We do not know why decided to disclose Patrick Byrne's subpoena now.

Instead, Patrick Byrne and his henchman Judd Bagley (Director of Social Media at have continued their smear campaign against me, members of the press, and others examining their actions.

So far, Patrick Byrne has offered no answer to my simple question.

Patrick Byrne's brutal campaign of deflection and smears continues.

However, the ongoing Securities and Exchange Commission investigation of continues, despite Patrick Byrne’s attempts to divert attention from his actions.

Written by:

Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)

For new additional information:

Gary Weiss blog: Bagdad Byrne's Weekend Delusion-a thon

The Fraudfiles blog: A little slight of hand by Patrick Byrne, CEO of, by Tracy Coenen

O-Smear blog: Exposing online smear campaigns for what they really are

Please read my previous blog posts about


Popular Posts

Did a Clever SEC Bait Goldman Sachs into Compounding Its Legal Problems With the "Kiss of Death" Message?

Updated: At 3:48 AM ET 04/20/2010 on bottom

The Kiss of Death

In filing its lawsuit against Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) on a Friday, the Securities and Exchange Commission sent what I call the "kiss of death" message to the embattled company. In other words, the SEC wanted to stick it to Goldman Sachs and Fabrice Tourre, the Executive Director of Goldman Sachs International, who is also a defendant in the complaint. While the SEC as a practice does inform target companies and individuals of an impending enforcement action, it does not always tell them exactly when such an action will be filed.

Apparently, the SEC filed its lawsuit without giving Goldman Sachs the heads up that it was planning to file it that day. Business Insider observed that Goldman Sachs was clearly unprepared to respond to the complaint as news of the lawsuit dominated the headlines all day. Goldman issued a short denial around noon and issued an extensive denial late in the afternoon, after most people had … CEO Patrick Byrne Sleeps With a Gun

In numerous blog posts in the past, and in widespread media coverage, evidence has accumulated for years that CEO (NASDAQ: OSTK) Patrick Byrne has shown signs of being mentally unbalanced and paranoid.

Byrne has blamed his company's financial woes on an unnamed "Sith Lord." He hired paid goons to stalk his real and imagined adversaries and to write lengthy conspiracy theories on the Internet. Byrne has close ties with Bo Gritz. The Anti-Defamation League lists Bo Gritz as a far-right extremist with “extensive connections to both white supremacists and anti-government groups and leaders.”

Patrick Byrne's infamous temper tantrums when he doesn’t get want he wants are well documented too. He made obscene and misogynistic comments to a female reporter. He suggested that she gave “blowjobs” to Goldman Sachs traders. He suggested that a male reporter “Sucks It Likes He’s Paying the Rent.” An independent research analyst was told that “You deserve to be whippe…

Nature's Sunshine Products, Willbros Group, Cal Dive International, and BSQUARE Violate S.E.C. Rules on Calculating EBITDA

Nature’s Sunshine Products (NASDAQ: NATR), Willbros Group (NYSE: WG), Cal Dive International (NYSE: DVR), and BSQUARE (NASDAQ: BSQR) have recently issued earnings reports which include a calculation of EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) that apparently does not comply with Securities and Exchange Commission interpretations for Regulation G governing such non-GAAP financial measures. In each case, their erroneous EBITDA calculations have enabled them to significantly distort their financial performance by erroneously reporting a positive EBITDA, when they should have reported a negative EBITDA in the latest quarter.

How EBITDA is supposed to be calculated under Regulation G

According to the S.E.C. Compliance & Disclosure Interpretations, EBITDA is defined under Regulation G as net income (not operating income) before net interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. See below:

Question 103.01Question: Exchange Act Release No. 47226 describes E…

InterOil, John Thomas Financial, and Clarion Finanz: Anatomy of a Stock Market Manipulation Scheme

In this blog post, I will provide evidence of what I believe is a stock market manipulation scheme involving InterOil (NYSE: IOC), John Thomas Financial, and Clarion Finanz AG. I believe that InterOil with the assistance of Clarion Finanz concealed John Thomas Financial’s involvement in helping it raise $95 million through a private placement of convertible debt securities.

Clarion Finanz acted as a buffer between InterOil and John Thomas Financial to help InterOil hide John Thomas Financial's role in raising funds. Afterwards, InterOil filed false and misleading reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission in an effort to conceal John Thomas Financial’s role in helping the company raise $95 million in convertible debt.

Carl Caserta, who in 1991 was barred by the Securities and Exchange Commission from “association with any broker, dealer, or investment advisor” played a role in helping InterOil use John Thomas Financial to obtain funds from investors. InterOil, John Thoma…

Class Action Complaint against Amedisys uses Sarbanes-Oxley Act Corporate Governance Provisions to Battle Alleged Corporate Malfeasance

Updated at bottom of article

Last week, Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP filed a class action lawsuit against Amedisys (NASDAQ: AMED) charging the company, its CEO William F. Borne and its CFO Dale E. Redman with securities fraud.  In the next few days, Bernstein Liebhard LLP and Finkelstein Thompson LLP filed similar class action lawsuits against the company. The lawsuits allege that Amedisys abused Medicare's reimbursement system for at-home therapy care based on a compelling analysis of company revenues in an April 27 Wall Street Journal article.

In addition, the lawsuits innovatively utilize a provision under Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 which provides a back-door way for investors to force ethical corporate governance and sue public companies for malfeasance. That provision requires Senior Financial Officers, such as the CEO and CFO of public companies, to abide by a strict code of ethics which broadly defines corporate malfeasance and effectively makes…