We're not sure if you all have seen this week's expose' by the Capital Outlook, but it seems like my former professors' newspaper is also smelling a rat, or atleast sees blood in the water. Check out: Inspecting & FAMU Audit Still Raising Questions
Can someone please tell Rosey that the $2.7M surplus is not a surplus but a decrease in assets from $29M to $2.7M; and profit (surplus) and losses went from -$3M to -$10.4M?
Dang I am tired of him giving IP Bryant credit for a nonexistence surplus!
According to the report, “these misstatements were due, in part, because some purchases of capital assets such as computers, computer software, and land were expensed when they should have been capitalized and because numerous expense items, such as payments for supplies and cellular telephone charges were improperly coded as depreciable capital assets.”
Wasn't this what Bernard Ebbers was doing at MCI Worldcom where he went to prison for fraud.
Anonymous @ 7/13/2006 10:17 AM gets the "FAMU Common Sense" Award!
I think the problem is that many people in Rattler Country (especially on our BOT) do not understand the difference between an asset and a surplus.
An asset is "anything owned by an individual that has a cash value. This includes property, goods, savings or investments."
A surplus is "an excess of revenue (profit) over expenditure (costs)."
An asset does not become revenue until it is liquidated (turned into cash, usually done by means of selling the asset).
Although FAMU suffered a $3M revenue loss under Fred Gainous, at least our assets increased enough for us completely cover the loss (if we chose).
Even if we liquidated all $2.7M of the new assets acquired under Castell Bryant this year, it would not come close to covering the $10M revenue loss.
Now, the answer for today's Final Jeopardy question is this: These are the intangible assets (assets that do not have a physical presence, such as goodwill, a patent or a trademark) that were also damaged by Castell Bryant.
Can someone please tell Rosey that the $2.7M surplus is not a surplus but a decrease in assets from $29M to $2.7M; and profit (surplus) and losses went from -$3M to -$10.4M?
ReplyDeleteDang I am tired of him giving IP Bryant credit for a nonexistence surplus!
From the Capital Outlook article:
ReplyDeleteAccording to the report, “these misstatements were due, in part, because some purchases of capital assets such as computers, computer software, and land were expensed when they should have been capitalized and because numerous expense items, such as payments for supplies and cellular telephone charges were improperly coded as depreciable capital assets.”
Wasn't this what Bernard Ebbers was doing at MCI Worldcom where he went to prison for fraud.
I would tell him, but we ain't speaking!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 7/13/2006 10:17 AM gets the "FAMU Common Sense" Award!
ReplyDeleteI think the problem is that many people in Rattler Country (especially on our BOT) do not understand the difference between an asset and a surplus.
An asset is "anything owned by an individual that has a cash value. This includes property, goods, savings or investments."
A surplus is "an excess of revenue (profit) over expenditure (costs)."
An asset does not become revenue until it is liquidated (turned into cash, usually done by means of selling the asset).
Although FAMU suffered a $3M revenue loss under Fred Gainous, at least our assets increased enough for us completely cover the loss (if we chose).
Even if we liquidated all $2.7M of the new assets acquired under Castell Bryant this year, it would not come close to covering the $10M revenue loss.
Now, the answer for today's Final Jeopardy question is this: These are the intangible assets (assets that do not have a physical presence, such as goodwill, a patent or a trademark) that were also damaged by Castell Bryant.
Start the clock...
Can you really put a price on that?
ReplyDeleteWhat are: FAMU's relationship with NSF, the Industry Cluster, and FAMU's brand name (largest single-campus HBCU, SBI, Pharmacy, etc.)?
ReplyDeleteWager: $10,000