Skip to main content

Why did President and COO Jason C. Lindsey really resign?

According to a Securities and Exchange Commission 8-K filing by (NASDAQ: OSTK) late yesterday afternoon on January 2, 2008:

On December 31, 2007, Mr. Jason C. Lindsey resigned, effective immediately, from his positions as President, Chief Operating Officer (principal operating officer) and a member of the Board of Directors of, Inc. (the "Company"). Mr. Lindsey intends to spend more time with his family, but also intends to remain a part-time employee of the Company and to work on special projects as requested from time to time by the Company. Copies of a press release issued by the Company regarding Mr. Lindsey's resignation and of Mr. Lindsey's letter of resignation are furnished herewith. Mr. Lindsey's principal duties will revert to the Company's Chief Executive Officer, Patrick M. Byrne.

However, at 8:41 PM (local Utah time) on New Years Eve of the same day that Jason C. Lindsey resigned, but before news of his resignation was released, Patrick Byrne posting under his alias Hannibal on the InvestorVillage message board, claimed that his "calender (sic) is clearing up a bit." Did Patrick Byrne know about Jason C. Lindsey's resignation at the time of his message board posting? Why would Byrne have more spare time if he knew that that Jason C. Lindsey was resigning? Perhaps it was as big a surprise to Byrne as it was to the rest of the market?

According to Jason C. Lindsey's resignation letter, he claimed that he discussed his resignation with Patrick Byrne during the afternoon of December 31, 2007, before Byrne's InvestorVillage message board post above. Was the letter backdated or how could the delusional Byrne have more spare time after losing his President and COO?

The question is, why is Lindsey resigning now?

Was the SEC investigation of an undisclosed factor in Jason C. Lindsey's resignation? is the subject of a continuing investigation by the SEC, particularly into its accounting and disclosures. Patrick Byrne has admitted to being the target of the SEC probe, in contrast to his previous denials. had waited until almost an entire year to disclose Patrick Byrne's receipt of a personal subpoena from the SEC.

During fiscal year 2006, lost over $100 million and had negative gross margins on its direct sales in the last quarter as its total revenues declined. One issue that the SEC is considering in its investigation is if had taken artificially low inventory reserves in the previous quarters of fiscal year 2006 to decrease reported losses, waiting until after an infusion of about $40 million in new equity on December 15, 2006, before taking appropriate inventory write downs.

The timing of the write-down looks all the more unusual considering comments made by management at the time. During the fourth quarter fiscal year 2006 earnings conference call, but before had released its 10-K report that included inventory reserve disclosures, Jason C. Lindsey explained’s negative gross margins and lower inventory levels as follows:

We took all that to heart in the fourth quarter and although the fourth quarter results are very bad, and I admit they are very bad, they were bad on purpose. In other words, we used the fourth quarter to get rid of all the slow-moving inventory. I am quite pleased with the inventory balances we have now....I am pleased that the fourth quarter is now over. We have sold it. Our inventory turns are much higher. Our margins are much higher and it really does feel like we have made a lot of progress there.

Note: Bold print and italics added by me.

The key words are “I admit they are very bad, they were bad on purpose… we used the fourth quarter to get rid of all the slow moving inventory.”

Just a few short weeks later, the company would release its 10-K for the year. In that filing, the company reported its highest ever level of inventory reserves, making it quite clear that the slow moving inventory had not been moved (contrary to Lindsey’s earlier assertion).

It gets worse from here. Soon it would be revealed that Byrne and Lindsey had a plan for earnings management at the end of 2006. During the earnings conference call for the next quarter (first quarter fiscal year 2007) Patrick Byrne made the following startling admission of’s previously undisclosed “game plan” for the previous fiscal year 2006, that reinforced Jason C. Lindsey’s comment that the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006 was “very bad…bad on purpose.”

We had our game plan. Really, we had our game plan as of Q1 last year [2006] of what was going to have to happen.

We knew things were going to get really ugly and the company was going to have take medicine but that we could come out of it a far better company, and that medicine was going to be in the form of some expenses, it was going to be in the form of dumping a bunch of inventory as we figured out really how to take our inventory management to the next level -- all kinds of things. We knew it was going to get ugly. Maybe not as ugly as it got but we thought we would come out in the first quarter smelling like a rose operationally and this is exactly what we -- what I at least thought was going to happen in the first quarter.

Note: Bold print and italics added by me. [Bracketed] information added for clarity.

The key words here are, “….we used the fourth quarter to get rid of all the slow-moving inventory. I am quite pleased with the inventory balances we have now....I am pleased that the fourth quarter is now over. We have sold it.”

Well, one part of the duo’s statements is true. Things got very ugly. During fiscal year 2006, had huge losses (over $100 million) and in fact Overstock dumped a bunch of inventory. Gross inventory levels (before reserves) started the year at about $98.5 million and dropped to about $26.9 million by the end of the year, about a $71.6 million drop in inventory.

But, the bad inventory wasn’t gone. This is clear because inventory reserves rose from about $5.2 million at the beginning of the year to about $6.6 million at the end of the year. On a relative basis, inventory reserves went up a staggering 361% from about 5.3% of gross inventory at the beginning of the year to 24.5% of inventory at the end of the year.

See chart below:

Selected Inventory Information from's SEC filings

Quarter Ended 12/31/05

Quarter Ended 03/31/06

Quarter Ended 06/30/06

Quarter Ended 09/30/06

Quarter Ended 12/31/06

Gross Inventory (in millions of dollars)






Reserve for Obsolete and Damaged Inventory (in millions of dollars)






Net Inventory (in millions of dollars)






Percentage of Reserve for Obsolete and Damaged Inventory to Gross Inventory






The key question

How could have “sold it” and gotten “rid of all the slow moving inventory” if the company actually estimated that it had more slow moving inventory in both absolute dollars and relative amounts?

A revealing comment by Jason C. Lindsey

During the second quarter fiscal year 2007, earnings conference call Jason C. Lindsey revealed:

To support this level of sales and have $17 million of inventory when at the same time a year ago I think we had close to $80 million, the amount of mistakes that can be buried in that are much smaller.

Note: Bold print and italics added by me.

Was burying its “mistakes” until after its equity infusion of about $40 million on December 15, 2006?

While Jason C. Lindsey may have resigned to spend more time with “family” and “outside ventures” he will need to allot a considerable amount of time during 2008 to explain this series of deceptive comments (and a whole host of other deceptive comments) to the SEC, lawyers for Copper River and Gradient, and perhaps other regulatory authorities.

Written by:

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


I'm not sure too much can be read into the Q4 increase in reserves. They could have a process for valuing inventory that's consistent and maybe even sensible and changes in response to new information. Flooding their model with a lot of data from sales at cut rate prices, as they did, could have had the effect of automatically lowering the valuation item by item.

My guess is that the resignation is what cleared up PB's calendar. Not sure how that works.

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

Suggested Reading: Hatchet Man Judd Bagley's Downward Spiral: Junkie, Confessed Criminal, Admitted Adulterer by Sam Antar (here), and Closing the File on a Criminal and Junkie Named Judd Bagley by Gary Weiss (here)

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 commen…

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…