Skip to main content Was Ineligible to File a Registration Statement Last December

Yesterday, I described how (NASDAQ: OSTK) defaulted on its loan covenants with U.S. Bank because of its failure to a file timely report with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, I detailed how the company improperly delayed disclosure of the loan default until it could obtain a waiver from the bank. Now it appears that’s failure to file a timely report with the S.E.C. made it ineligible to file its Form S-3 registration statement on December 9, 2011 where it is seeking to raise additional funds to keep the company afloat. In addition,'s continuing failure to comply with S,E.C. rules could indicate that is has a material weakness in internal controls. The company seems to be incapable of complying with S.E.C. rules even as it faces a continuing investigation by the regulator into previous financial shenanigans.


On March 21, 2011, filed a proxy statement and asked its shareholders to vote at the annual meeting on how frequently the company should seek an “advisory vote” on the compensation of its executive officers. Shareholders were given a choice on whether the advisory vote should be held every year, two years, three years, or to abstain from voting. The vote was “not binding.” The Board of Directors could ultimately decide, " hold an advisory vote on executive compensation more or less frequently, as applicable, than the option approved by our stockholders." After the Board finally reaches its decision, the company is required to file an amended 8-K report. At the annual meeting on May 4, 2011, shareholders approved an “advisory vote” every three years.

On Friday, January 6, 2012, filed an amended 8-K report and disclosed that its Board reached a final decision about the frequency of advisory votes on its executive’s compensation:

Consistent with the stockholders’ advisory vote on this matter, Overstock intends to hold future stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation once every three years until the next required vote on the frequency of stockholder votes on executive compensation.

It turned out that the amended 8-K report filed on January 6, 2012 was filed late. It should have been filed on September 30, 2011. Since the company failed to file timely reports with the S.E.C., it defaulted on its loan covenants with U.S. Bank. The company failed to disclose that its amended 8-K report was filed late and it failed to notify investors about the loan default. Under S.E.C. rules, an “event of default” is required to be disclosed within four business days (8-K General Instructions and Item 2.04). Instead, improperly delayed disclosure of its failure to file timely reports with the S.E.C. and its loan default until February 17, 2012, a day after it resolved its default issues with U.S. Bank. The bank granted the company a waiver of default “effective as of September 30, 2011”, the same day that the amended 8-K report was supposed to be filed.

Ineligible to file a Form S-3 Registration Statement’s late filing of the amended 8-K report made it ineligible to file its Form S-3 Registration Statement on December 9, 2011. held its annual meeting on May 4, 2011. filed its amended 8-K report on January 6, 2012. Under Item 5.07 (d) of S.E.C. rules for filing an 8-K report, a company’s decision on the frequency of its advisory vote involving executive compensation must be disclosed:

(d) No later than one hundred fifty calendar days after the end of the annual or other meeting of shareholders at which shareholders voted on the frequency of shareholder votes on the compensation of executives....

Since the S.E.C rules cite “calendar days” rather than business days, it was required to file an amended 8-K report by Friday, September 30, 2011, 149 "calendar days" after the annual meeting of shareholders. U.S. Bank waived the default stemming from the late filing “effective as of September 30, 2011.” Therefore, the company did not comply with S.E.C. rules under Item 5.07 due to its late filing of the amended 8-K report.

On December 9, 2011, filed a Form S-3 shelf registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission that would allow it to sell up to $200 million of its debt securities, common stock, warrants and other securities. On December 20, 2011, the S.E.C. gave a "Notice of Effectiveness" on its Form S-3 registration statement. On December 22, 2011, filed its prospectus with the S.E.C. When made those filings pursuant to its Form S-3 Registration Statement it was not current on all its filings as required by S.E.C. rules. Its amended 8-K report filed on January 6, 2012, should have been filed on September 30, 2011 to comply with S.E.C. rules under Item 5.07.

Under S.E.C. rules, a company that does not comply with Item 5.07 on an 8-K report loses its eligibility to file a Form S-3 registration statement. According to an article written in the New York Law Journal written by Guy P. Lander:

Companies must disclose their decisions as to how often they will hold say-on-pay votes going forward either in the Form 8-K disclosing their annual meeting voting results or in an amendment to that Form 8-K. If companies choose the amendment to the Form 8-K, it must be filed led no later than 150 calendar days following their annual meetings and at least 60 calendar days before their deadlines for submission of shareholder proposals. Missing the filing deadline for this Item 5.07 of Form 8-K will cause issuers to lose their eligibility to file Form S-3 registration statements (absent a subsequent waiver from the SEC Staff). [Emphasis added.] was not eligible to file its Form 3 Registration Statement because there is no safe harbor resulting from a failure to comply with Item 5.07 on Form 8-K. According to S.E.C. rules:

Item 5.07 is not among the list of items subject to the safe harbor from liability in Rules 13a-11 [17 CFR 240.13a-11] and 15d-11[17 CFR 240.15d-11] under the Exchange Act. In addition, companies that fail to file a timely report required by Item 5.07 will lose their eligibility to file Form S-3 registration statements. [Page 49, Footnote 168].

Does have a material weakness in internal controls?'s failure to file a timely amended 8-K report could be indicative of a material weakness in internal controls. For example, the S.E.C. Division of Corporation Finance asked China Lithium Technologies (CLTT:OTC BB) to explain why certain problems, including a "Failure to file timely a current report on Form 8-K pursuant to Item 5.07...", was not indicative of a weakness in disclosure controls and procedures. The company responded by saying, "...our amended 2010 Form 10-K will include an acknowledgement of the material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures." (See pages 8 and 9.). should file an amended 10-Q report for the quarter ended September 30, 2011. On the very first page of the 10-Q report the company inaccurately asserted that it filed all required reports.

Ongoing S.E.C. investigation into fabricated earnings

Patrick Byrne
Over the last several years, this blog has detailed various illegal accounting shenanigans used by to materially overstate its financial performance. From Q2 2007 to Q2 2008, the company used improper EBITDA calculations to materially inflate its pro forma earnings in violation of S.E.C. Regulation G. For example, in the quarter ended June 30, 2008 reported a positive $1.117 million EBITDA using an improper calculation instead of a negative $0.430 million EBITDA had it complied with Regulation G. From Q4 2008 to Q3 2009, the company violated Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and materially inflated its reported earnings. For example, in the quarter ended December 31, 2008, the company improperly reported a $1.014 million profit by violating GAAP instead of a $0.705 million loss. In both cases I alerted the company by providing detailed information about its accounting irregularities. However, its CEO Patrick Byrne chose to vilify me rather than immediately correct its financial reports.

My accounting analysis was proven correct by's later revisions of financial reports. In September 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission started an investigation of the company after I complained to the regulator. In March 2010, was forced to restate its financial reports to correct various GAAP violations initially identified in this blog. The S.E.C. investigation of is ongoing.

California District Attorneys allege consumer fraud is being sued by District Attorneys from seven California District Attorneys who are alleging consumer fraud. They are seeking at least $15 million of restitution, fines, penalties, and cost reimbursements from the company for allegedly defrauding consumers. The Judge in that case had to compel an uncooperative to turn over information to the California District Attorneys.

Written by:

Sam E. Antar


I am a convicted felon and a former CPA. As the criminal CFO of Crazy Eddie, I helped my cousin Eddie Antar and other members of his family mastermind one of the largest securities frauds uncovered during the 1980's. I committed my crimes in cold-blood for fun and profit, and simply because I could. If it weren't for the heroic 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.

There is a saying, "It takes one to know one." Today, I work very closely with the FBI, IRS, SEC, Justice Department, and other federal and state law enforcement agencies in training them to identify and catch white-collar criminals. Often, I refer cases to them as an independent whistleblower. I teach white-collar crime classes for various government entities, professional organizations, businesses, and colleges and universities. I do not seek or want forgiveness for my vicious crimes from my victims. My past sins are unforgivable.

I do not own any securities long or short.


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…