Skip to main content Delays Filing 10-K, Reports Even More GAAP Violations, While Patrick Byrne Hides

CEO Patrick M. Byrne intoxicated
Yesterday, (NASDAQ: OSTK) filed a Notification of Late Filing (Form 12b-25) for its 2009 annual 10-K report at around 4:23 PM (Eastern) or about 37 minutes before the drop-dead deadline when the 10-K report was due to be filed.

The Notification of Late Filing identifies new previously undisclosed material violations of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and other Securities and Exchange Commission disclosure rules. The company needs more time to determine the accounting impact of certain material GAAP violations first acknowledged by the company on January 29 and new GAAP violations reported by the company in its "Notification of Late Filing."

Apparently, KPMG who was hired as's new auditors after they fired Grant Thornton, has finally learned what I've known for a very long time: The deeper you dig into's financial reporting, the more black holes (GAAP and SEC disclosure violations) you will find.

Newest Found GAAP Violations

As I discussed above,'s Notification of Late Filing includes both previously disclosed and newly discovered GAAP violations. Those new GAAP violations were highlighted by me in the text below in bold and italic print:
As announced on January 29, 2010,, Inc. (the “Company”) is restating its previously issued financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 (including the interim periods within that fiscal year), and the quarterly periods ended March 31, 2009, June 30, 2009 and September 30, 2009 to correct errors related to:

Operational errors and the accounting for amounts that the Company pays its drop ship fulfillment partners and an amount due from a vendor that went undiscovered for a period of time. Specifically, these errors related to (1) amounts the Company paid to partners or deducted from partner payments related to return processing services and product costs and (2) amounts the Company paid to a freight vendor based on incorrect invoices from the vendor.  Once discovered the Company applied “gain contingency” accounting for the recovery of such amounts, which was an inappropriate accounting treatment.

The accounting for certain of the Company’s share-based compensation plans. Specifically, the Company incorrectly amortized the expense related to restricted stock units based on the actual three year vesting schedule rather than a three year straight line amortization schedule and applied an outdated forfeiture rate in calculating share-base compensation expense under the plans.

Identification of amounts related to customer refunds and credits not properly included in the Company’s monthly reconciliation of customer refunds and credits to third party statements to determine the completeness and accuracy of returns expense.

The accounting for certain external audit fees on a ratable basis, instead of as incurred.
The recognition of co-branded credit card bounty revenue and promotion expense on an immediate recognition basis, instead of over time.

The late recognition of a reduction in the restructuring accrual for a new sublease and the recognition of interest expense related to the accretion of the restructuring accrual.

Other miscellaneous corrections and reclassifications, none of which were material either individually or in the aggregate. nonchalantly lumped in its latest GAAP violations with other GAAP violations previously disclosed by the company on January 29, rather than separately disclosing them. Those newly identified GAAP violations add to a long laundry list of other violations some of which are discussed in more detail below. Because I have exposed various financial reporting violations by, Patrick Byrne ridiculously considers me to be an "" blogger.

SEC Regulation G Violations

In various blog posts during 2007 and 2008, I exposed how violated SEC Regulation G by using an improper EBITDA calculation to materially overstate its financial performance from Q2 2007 to Q2 2008. When I confronted management about its EBITDA violations, Patrick Byrne, Jonathan Johnson, and David Chidester lied about the company's compliance with SEC Regulation G during quarterly conference calls and Byrne vilified me for even raising the issue.

In Q3 2008, finally corrected its improper EBITDA calculation by calling it "adjusted EBITDA" when it restated financial reports and amended its filings with the SEC to correct certain GAAP violations involving customer refund and credit errors described below. However, the company improperly failed to disclose in its amended SEC filings that the reason for changing its EBITDA calculation was because of violations of Regulation G (Details from my blog here and from Lee Webb's Stockwatch article here).'s Illegal "Cookie Jar" Reserves

In October 2008, restated its financial reports from Q1 2003 to Q3 2008 to correct certain customer refund and credit errors.

In February 2009, I correctly reported in my blog that the October 2008 restatement did not include corrections arising from underbilled offsetting costs and reimbursements that were already earned from its fulfillment partners during those same corresponding periods, less a reasonable estimate of uncollectable amounts. should have gone back and corrected or restated its financial reports to reflect income already earned from offsetting costs and reimbursements due from its fulfillment partners, less a reasonable estimate for uncollectable amounts (See SFAS No. 154 and SFAS No 5 paragraph 1, 2, 8 and 23).

Instead, improperly deferred income that it earned but underbilled its fulfillment partners during prior reporting periods (Q3 2008 and before) to by moving such income to future reporting periods (Q4 2008, Q1 2009, Q2 2009, and Q3 2009). In other words, took income that should have been reported in prior reporting periods (Q3 2008 and before) and moved it to future reporting periods (Q4 2008 and later) to materially overstate its financial performance in those later reporting periods.

In effect, violated GAAP by creating an illegal cookie jar reserve to materially inflate future earnings or reduce future losses from Q4 2008 to Q3 2009. ridiculously claimed that the collection of the entire amount of its underbillings (every single penny) “was not assured” and instead falsely claimed that a "gain contingency" existed rather than make a reasonable estimate of uncollectable amounts as required under SFAS No. 5. Therefore, improperly recognized income from underbilled fulfillment partners as amounts due to the company were collected on a non-GAAP cash basis, rather when they were earned under accrual accounting or GAAP. (More details can be found in my Open Letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission here).

Starting in February 2009, I notified both and the SEC about the company's illegal "cookie jar" reserve and its phony "gain contingency." CEO Patrick Byrne responded by claiming that:

Antar's ramblings are gibberish. Show them to any accountant and they will confirm. He has no clue what he is talking about.

Instead of properly restating its financial reports to correct its intentional breach of GAAP and other SEC disclosure rules, CEO Patrick Byrne continued to respond by orchestrating a massive corporate sponsored retaliation campaign against me and other critics who agreed with my findings. In addition, Patrick Byrne, company President Jonathan Johnson, former CFO David Chidester, and others blatantly lied to and misled shareholders during various conference calls and vilified me in an attempt to cover up their financial reporting manipulation schemes.

In March 2009, fired PricewaterhouseCoopers as its auditors and hired Grant Thornton to replace them.

In September 2009, the SEC Enforcement Division took a very rare step and re-opened a previously closed probe of financial reporting irregularities at A few weeks later, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance started a parallel probe of the company's financial reporting irregularities.

In October 2009, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance discovered that overpaid a fulfillment partner $785,000 during 2008. The company recovered that overpayment in Q1 2009 and improperly reported the overpayment recovery as income in that same quarter, rather than properly restate its 2008 financial reports to correct that error. improperly concealed the recovery of the overpayment by including that amount in recoveries from underbilled fulfillment partners in Q1 2009 instead of separately disclosing the overpayment recovery in its financial reports.

Grant Thornton claimed that it did not know about the 2008 overpayment and Q1 2009 recovery from the fulfillment partner until October 2009. After learning about the overpayment, Grant Thornton told that it must restate its prior financial reports to correct that error to comply with GAAP.

On November 13, 2009, fired and vilified Grant Thornton, rather than restate its financial reports and later filed an "unreviewed" Q3 2009 10-Q that finally disclosed the overpayment to the fulfillment partner. In this case too, improperly claimed that a "gain contingency" existed as justification for not restating its financial reports to correct the overpayment error.

On December 28, 2009, KPMG replaced Grant Thornton as's auditors.

My Vindication

On January 29, 2010 finally ate crow and admitted that its accounting for recoveries from both underbilled and overpaid fulfillment partners was "inappropriate" and that no gain contingency existed, as I previously reported in my blog. The company reported that its financial reports from Q1 2008 to Q3 2009 "should no longer be relied upon" and that it will restate its financial reports to correct its GAAP violations (More details here.)

Simply said, I was right and was wrong. I was able to identify material GAAP and SEC disclosure violations that's management, its audit committee, and its former auditors at PricewaterhouseCoopers were unable and unwilling to identify and correct. As I detailed above, KPMG has  found even more material GAAP violations as nonchalantly disclosed in its "Notification of Late Filing."

Patrick Byrne in Hiding

I recently sent CEO Patrick Byrne and audit committee member Joseph J. Tabacco the following emails below requesting a full apology from the company and the removal of defamatory remarks from's website and its related party Deep Capture LLC website:

From: Sam E. Antar
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 11:02 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Restatement
Importance: High

Hi Patrick:

Will you finally admit that I was correct when I reported in my blog that violated GAAP by using a phony gain contingency in light of the company’s recently announced restatement?
You owe me a public apology.



I received no reponse from Patrick Byrne.

A day later, I tried to get a response from him again. This time I cc'd Audit Committee member Joseph J. Tabacco Jr, certain persons from the SEC, and certain journalists. At least Tabacco and the others sent me "read receipts" acknowledging that they received and read my email. However, Byrne failed to respond to me and stayed in hiding.

From: Sam E. Antar
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 2:12 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Cc: Joseph J. Tabacco Jr. ( Audit Committee), persons from SEC, and certain journalists
Subject: FW: Restatement
Importance: High
 Having not received a response from last night’s email (see below), I am asking for a response to the following question I asked you in that email:

Will you finally admit that I was correct when I reported in my blog that violated GAAP by using a phony gain contingency in light of the company’s recently announced restatement?
 In addition, I have the following questions:

Will you finally admit that I was correct when I reported in my blog that used an improper EBITDA from Q2 2007 to Q2 2008 in violation of SEC Regulation G to materially inflate its financial performance, in light of its later amended disclosures?

Will you publicly admit that I was right about’s violations of GAAP and other SEC disclosure rules (such as Regulation G)?

Will you publicly admit that you were wrong when you claimed that the company was complying with GAAP and other SEC disclosure rules, while at the same time you were publicly defaming me and other critics?

Will the company admit that I notified audit committee member Joseph J. Tabacco about’s GAAP and SEC disclosure violations (such as Regulation G) and continued to issue improper financial reports until it was forced to make corrections in its financial reporting?

As the CEO of you owe me a public apology.


Sam E. Antar
The next day, I sent an email directly to Joseph J. Tabacco Jr. and cc'd Patrick Byrne, certain persons from the SEC, and certain journalists. While Tabacco sent me a "read receipt" acknowledging my email, he failed to respond to me. Byrne continued to duck the issues, too.

From: Sam E. Antar []
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 3:25 PM
To: Joseph J. Tabacco Jr. ( Audit Committee)
Cc: Patrick Byrne, persons from the Securities and Exchange Commission, and certain journalists
Subject: Financial Reporting Violations
Importance: High

To Joseph J. Tabacco ( Audit Committee Member):

On’s website, there is a page labeled “Naked Short Selling” and on that page is a link labeled “November 2008 – Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff comments on blogger Sam Antar.” Here is the link:

First off, I have never been involved any illegal naked short selling.

Second, how can label me as an “ blogger” when?:

I correctly reported in my blog that used an improper EBITDA from Q2 2007 to Q2 2008 in violation of SEC Regulation G to materially inflate its financial performance, in light of its later amended disclosures.

I correctly reported in my blog that violated GAAP by using a phony gain contingency in light of the company’s recently announced restatement.

The company has the nerve to falsely imply that I am naked short selling and am an “ blogger” even though I correctly exposed financial reporting violations by the company as cited above.

Simply said,, its audit committee, its management, and its auditors were wrong and I was right about SEC disclosure violations such as Regulation G and the company’s GAAP violation that led to its recently announced restatement.

I did the job that and its auditors were unable and unwilling to do as evidenced by its delayed response in correcting financial reporting violations that were reported in my blog and its vicious campaign to smear me and other critics rather than immediately correct its financial reporting violations.
Third, please note Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff received $5,000 in cash from a few days prior to writing his defamatory letter about me. Both Chief Deputy Attorney General Kirk Torgensen and Deputy Attorney General Richard Hamp acknowledged that Shurtleff’s claims about me were false in various tape recorded conversations cited in my blog.

For additional information, read my blog post entitled, “ (NASDAQ: OSTK) CEO Patrick Byrne Pays Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff to Defame a Blogger.” Link here:,

Therefore, I respectfully request a full public apology from and that the company remove all false and defamatory references to me in its web site and its Deep Capture web site immediately.


Sam E. Antar
I have no doubt that's management and audit committee will continue their violate fiduciary duties to shareholders while vilifying any critic who uncovers any financial reporting irregularities and other misconduct by the company.

At least KPMG has uncovered some previously undisclosed material GAAP and SEC disclosure violations by the company. However, it's only the tip of the iceberg. All I can say for now, is that newly discovered documentation of misconduct and financial reporting irregularities by is in the right hands.

At this time, I will provide no closure for Patrick Byrne or KPMG about what I already know and what the company has knowingly failed to disclose to its auditors and investors. They'll have to keep guessing while Patrick Byrne remains under the delusion that he can run and hide from accountability for his actions.

Written by,

Sam E. Antar


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 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.

In any case, exposing corporate crooks is a lot of fun for a forcibly "retired" crook like me. Analyzing's financial reporting is a forensic accountant's wet dream and Patrick Byrne is about to become the SEC's new orgasm.


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…