Skip to main content

Is Interoil Selling Investors Hope?

Interoil Corp (NYSE: IOC) has no proven oil and gas reserves. They may not have any "commercially viable reserves" at all. However, those facts have not stopped Vice President of Investor Relations at Interoil Corp, Mr. Wayne Andrews from privately hyping that “we’ve got over 3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, certified by resources by the number one Canadian engineer.” In addition, a report issued by “Canadian engineer” GLJ Petroleum Consultants Ltd contradicts Andrews hype by not certifying any proven reserves and merely calling them “contingent resources” with “no certainty that it will be commercially viable to produce any portion of the contingent resources.”

My close friend, convicted felon turned fraud fighter Barry Minkow, co-founder of the Fraud Discovery Institute (FDI), has concluded the first phase of “a several month undercover investigation of Interoil Corp.” Minkow set up a new website called InterNoOil.com to release his findings on the company.

According to FDI’s press release:

The first release of information, with more to follow, contained an undercover, in person meeting between a licensed private investigator operative and the Vice President of Investor Relations at Interoil Corp, Mr. Wayne Andrews.

“This is a company that up until 2 days ago never reported a profit and never found oil in any material way and yet survives on hype which lead us to the “head-hyper” added Mr. Minkow, the Co-Founder of the Fraud Discovery Institute, Inc. “We focused on Mr. Andrews because he was the ‘lone analyst’ following IOC for years while working at Raymond James and is currently is the VP of Capital Markets and in charge of investor relations. With no proven oil and gas reserves and little to no earnings, we opened up an investigation into just how much “hyping goes on behind closed doors at Interoil Corp (NYSE:IOC).

According to the transcript of one meeting, the FDI operative posed as a representative of several wealthy families who expressed interest in investing between 25 and 50 million into a bulk stock purchase with a company destined for a substantial stock price increase. “Although Mr. Andrews attempts to qualify some of his statements and even goes so far as saying ‘I don’t want to go to jail’ for saying something inappropriate, he does appear to turn right around and say inappropriate things” added Barry Minkow.

To prevent quotes being taken out of context, the Fraud Discovery Institute, Inc has released both the unabridged transcript and audio portion of the in person meeting because, according to Mr. Minkow, the tape speaks for itself and needs no application.”

Minkow compares “Interoil’s public disclosures with the transcript of a private conversation, between a licensed private investigator operative posing as an investor and company Vice President of Capital Markets Wayne Andrews,” and raises “troubling questions about the company selling hope to possible investors.”

For example, Minkow cites the Roche case, where the SEC took the following position:

We long have held that predictions of specific and substantial increases in the price of a speculative security within a relatively short period of time are fraudulent. We also have held that predictions of specific and substantial increases in the price of any security that are made without a reasonable basis are fraudulent.

However, Minkow's report cites comments by Wayne Andrews which may be afoul of securities law by hyping "the level he believes the stock price and market capitalization for the company will be at in the future." See below:

1. According to the transcript, Andrews changes his hat from Interoil Vice President to analyst in a deliberate attempt to flout securities law by saying, “I’m probably not supposed to tell you what I think the share price can do, but I can tell you when I was an analyst, I covered the stock. I would talk to portfolio managers and used to tell them I believe that this is a several hundred dollar stock in the next three to five years.”

Minkow goes on to report that:

On pages 6; 14-15 of the transcript Mr. Andrews, no less than 3 times either agrees with the prediction of an IOC 200 dollar stock price or alludes to it himself.

For full details, please go to FDI's InterNoOil.com web site.

Other links:

Click here to read FDI press release.

Click here to read report on Interoil.

Click here to hear audio (mp3 format) from the undercover meeting.

Click here to read transcript of the undercover meeting.

Click here to watch Minkow's You Tube video.

Written by:

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

Disclosure:

While I have no position in Interoil securities long or short, this time I assisted Fraud Discovery Institute in researching Interoil. In addition, Minkow frequently owns a short position in public companies that FDI investigates.

Comments

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 …

Overstock.com 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 Overstock.com 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…