My reference was not meant to "prove out" any assumption. It is meant ONLY -- as stated -- as as starting point for EVIDENCE that the lack of audits and pursuit of "fresh start accounting" was a major reason behind the bankruptcy.
EVIDENCE was the request; EVIDENCE is the response. You can choose to believe or pursue it further, or not. It is more evidence than that [not] provided by whaleFR8 (though I don't care if he provides any or not) to substantiate his opinion regarding the role/significance of the Polar purchase in the bankruptcy. My opinion is based on evidence that includes the reference, but the single reference was not all the evidence available at the time.
Last edited by Intruder; 30th November 2007 at 02:24.