Skip to main content

Open Memo to Medifast Board Chairman Bradley T. MacDonald and Chief Executive and CFO Michael S. McDevitt: Grow Some Hair on Your Chest


To Bradley T. MacDonald and Michael S. McDevitt:

You both need to grow some hair on your chests and stop acting like whining cry babies to investors, securities regulators, and now, the federal courts. Yesterday, Medifast (NYSE: MED) and Bradley T. MacDonald filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit alleging defamation by Fraud Discovery Institute, its co-founder Barry Minkow, pyramid scheme expert Robert L. FitzPatrick, acclaimed forensic accountant and book author Tracy Coenen, best-selling author and former investigative journalist William Lobdell (who now writes for iBusiness Reporting, a blog funded by Fraud Discovery), and an anonymous Yahoo massage board poster (download lawsuit here and here).

Like your complaints to investors and securities regulators, your lawsuit fails to provide a detailed and credible substantive line-by-line rebuttal of serious allegations of improprieties concerning Medifast's business model, marketing practices, and financial disclosures made in reports issued by Fraud Discovery Institute, co-founded by convicted felon turned fraud fighter Barry Minkow.

Instead, the lawsuit reads like a cheaply produced late-night infomercial for insomniacs, rambles about the purported "health" benefits of Medifast products, and rants that Fraud Discovery Institute's reports are false. To support your claims of defamation, the lawsuit refers to self-serving claims on Medifast's website and disclosures in SEC filings which certain Defendants allege are false and misleading.

The lawsuit alleges that Barry Minkow orchestrated an illegal scheme to drive down the stock price of Medifast shares to profit from short selling. However, Minkow has a first amendment right to critique or to use your words "bash" Medifast, notwithstanding the fact that he publicly disclosed that he holds a short position in your company and is a convicted felon. Minkow's opinion and analysis is backed up by very detailed reports prepared for Fraud Discovery Institute by Mr. FitzPatrick and other data made fully available to the public for examination and scrutiny.

The Defendants will certainly assert "truth" as a defense to claims of defamation made against them in this lawsuit. That same kind of truth led a federal Judge in Utah to dismiss Usana's (NASDAQ: USNA) frivolous defamation claims against Fraud Discovery and Barry Minkow and award them legal fees covering their Court costs.

I remind you that discovery in civil litigation is a two-way street. Minkow and the other Defendants can now subpoena all of Medifast's books, records, and documents and closely scrutinize them to look for any possible improprieties and irregularities in defending themselves in this litigation. In addition, they can subpoena documents from Medifast's auditors, vendors, customers, and other business relationships. You and others will be subject to sharp questioning under oath in pre-trial depositions by the Defendant's attorneys. Now Medifast's business documents will ultimately become subject to close public examination and careful scrutiny if this case goes to trial.

I doubt that Minkow and the other Defendants are concerned about Medifast subpoenaing their documents and taking their sworn testimony. In any case, it will be interesting to see if Medifast is afraid to be transparent and moves for a protective order to quash any public examination and scrutiny of discovery information obtained by Minkow and the other Defendants.

One more thing, Medifast and MacDonald are suing an anonymous Yahoo message board poster known as "Medisdead" claiming for example, that:

Medisdead has defamed MacDonald by referring to him as "Pimp Daddy Brad."

You guys need to develop a "thick skin" rather than waste your time on message board postings. Some of your anonymous message board supporters have made anti-Semitic attacks and other libelous personal attacks on me and Minkow. Unlike you, Minkow and I are not complaining about them. At this time, we certainly don't blame you for such attacks, though some of those persons may be in contact with certain Medifast employees and/or business associates.

Instead of growing hair on your chests, it seems that you've chosen the route of premature baldness and grey hair. Regarding Medifast and certain of its business associates, I believe that this litigation will be disproportionately more time consuming, distracting, costly, and far more risky as compared to the Defendants in this legal action. You never know what kind of potential future trouble that a "needle in a hay stack" found in discovery by the Defendants can cause for Medifast and certain of its business relationships.

For a personal reference about me, just ask (NASDAQ: OSTK) CEO Patrick Byrne. Recently, was forced to eat crow by admitting to GAAP violations exposed in my blog and reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The company was forced to restate its financial reports for the third time in three years to correct those GAAP violations and is currently under SEC investigation as a direct result of reporting in my blog.

To borrow a quote from my dear friend Barry Minkow, similar efforts by other companies like and now Medifast to try to intimidate and silence their critics have been "tried and tossed."


Sam E. Antar


Gary Weiss - Medifast, Meet Barbra Streisand

...I have no opinion on Medifast except that a suit like this is just plain stupid. All it is going to accomplish is to disseminate Minkow's claims to people like myself who don't follow such things and ordinarily couldn't care less.

Update - The Defendants Respond:

Fraud Discovery Press Release

The Fraud Discovery Institute, Inc. announced today in a response to a lawsuit filed recently inSan Diego federal court by Medifast, Inc (NYSE:MED) on Wednesday, February 17th, 2010 thatthe company is reopening their investigation of Medifast, Inc and will zealously continue torelease accurate and truthful information about the company. “This is a case study in a muchbigger picture,” said Barry Minkow, Co-Founder of the Fraud Discovery Institute, Inc.“The conspiratorial approach utilized by public companies like Medifast, Inc. needs to be seenfor what it is—an all-out attack using threat and intimidation designed solely to silence anyonefrom speaking critically about their business model, their compensation plan or their alleged misrepresentations.”

Tracy Coenen: Medifast files lawsuit, Fraud Discovery reopens investigation

The complaint filed by Medifast contains pages of self-praise, along with attacks on the character of those involved in the investigation of the company. In one example of the attacks, Medifast falsely refers to multi-level marketing expert Robert FitzPatrick as “… a self-claimed expert in pyramid schemes.” A brief look at FitzPatrick’s work clearly shows he’s not a “self-claimed” expert on pyramid schemes. In fact, regulators around the world have utilized his expertise. The Federal Trade Commission has received training from him. FitzPatrick has also testified in state and federal courts as an expert witness on pyramid schemes.

William Lobdell: Fraud Discovery Responds to Medifast Lawsuit; promises not to back down reporting the truth


At the original time of this blog post, Minkow and the other defendants had not yet publicly responded to this lawsuit. I've updated this open memo to include their responses and other links.

Additional information:

Open Memo to Medifast Chief Executive and CFO Michael S. McDevitt: Cut the BS and Address Troubling Issues Raised by Barry Minkow


I am a convicted felon and a former CPA. As the criminal CFO of Crazy Eddie, I helped Eddie Antar and other members of his family mastermind one of the largest securities frauds uncovered during the 1980's. I committed my crimes, simply because I could.

If it weren't for the efforts of the FBI, SEC, Postal Inspector's Office, US Attorney's Office, and class action plaintiff's lawyers who investigated, prosecuted, and sued me, I would still be the criminal CFO of Crazy Eddie today.

I do not own Medifast securities short or long. Barry Minkow and I are close personal friends. From time-to-time, I do research on scam companies for Fraud Discovery Institute. However, this open memo, like my previous open memo, is an unsolicited freebie. In any case, please feel free to subpoena me and otherwise complain about me, too. See if I care.

I do not own securities short or long. My research on and in particular its lying CEO Patrick Byrne is a freebie for securities regulators and the public in order to help me get into heaven, though I doubt that I will ever get there anyway. I will probably end up joining corporate miscreants such as Patrick Byrne in hell.

Analyzing's financial reporting is a forensic accountant's wet dream and Patrick Byrne is about to become the SEC's new orgasm.

I do not own Usana securities short or long.

A few years ago, I helped fund Fraud Discovery Institute's investigations, including Usana.


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…