You continue to dodge questions about the SEC subpoenas. You have falsely claimed that "heart of the investigation is not...Overstock-centric."
However, Overstock.com, you, and others working in collusion with you are under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Will you admit that Overstock.com and you are the focus of an investigation by the SEC? Are you afraid to show transparency by answering my questions? Again I ask you to answer the questions below.
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that your press release issued on May 9, 2006 was responding to a personal SEC subpoena that you later received on May 17, 2006?
Is it your position that any person reading your May 9, 2006 press release would have known that you were going to receive a personal SEC subpoena on May 17, 2006?
If it is your position that the May 9, 2006 press release was adequate disclosure of both subpoenas, why did Overstock.com make a disclosure of your personal SEC subpoena about a year later on May 9, 2007?
Is it your position that there are no issues relating to the timing of disclosures by Overstock.com about your personal SEC subpoena?
Do you believe that your public comments on message boards concerning these subpoenas have been consistent with all of Overstock's disclosures in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission?
Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) on an earlier date?
When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did you first discuss your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
If it is your position that there was nothing improper with the delay by Overstock.com in disclosing your personal SEC subpoena, why did the company choose to disclose it at all?
If you truly wish to clear up this issue, why not respond to each of my questions individually in a clear, unambiguous, and truthful manner?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
Overstock.com, you, and others working in collusion with you are under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Will you admit that Overstock.com and you are the focus of an investigation by the SEC? Are you afraid to answer questions about the SEC subpoenas?
Therefore, I ask you to answer my questions again.
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that your press release issued on May 9, 2006 was responding to a personal SEC subpoena that you later received on May 17, 2006?
Is it your position that any person reading your May 9, 2006 press release would have known that you were going to receive a personal SEC subpoena on May 17, 2006?
If it is your position that the May 9, 2006 press release was adequate disclosure of both subpoenas, why did Overstock.com make a disclosure of your personal SEC subpoena about a year later on May 9, 2007?
Is it your position that there are no issues relating to the timing of disclosures by Overstock.com about your personal SEC subpoena?
Do you believe that your public comments on message boards concerning these subpoenas have been consistent with all of Overstock's disclosures in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission?
Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) on an earlier date?
When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did you first discuss your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
If it is your position that there was nothing improper with the delay by Overstock.com in disclosing your personal SEC subpoena, why did the company choose to disclose it at all?
If you truly wish to clear up this issue, why not respond to each of my questions individually in a clear, unambiguous, and truthful manner?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that your press release issued on May 9, 2006 was responding to a personal SEC subpoena that you later received on May 17, 2006?
Is it your position that any person reading your May 9, 2006 press release would have known that you were going to receive a personal SEC subpoena on May 17, 2006?
If it is your position that the May 9, 2006 press release was adequate disclosure of both subpoenas, why did Overstock.com make a disclosure of your personal SEC subpoena about a year later on May 9, 2007?
Is it your position that there are no issues relating to the timing of disclosures by Overstock.com about your personal SEC subpoena?
Do you believe that your public comments on message boards concerning these subpoenas have been consistent with all of Overstock's disclosures in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission?
Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) on an earlier date?
When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did you first discuss your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
If it is your position that there was nothing improper with the delay by Overstock.com in disclosing your personal SEC subpoena, why did the company choose to disclose it at all?
If you truly wish to clear up this issue, why not respond to each of my questions individually in a clear, unambiguous, and truthful manner?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
I read Judd Bagley's posts on AntiSocialMedia.net (referenced above by you).
Veni, Vidi, Wiki? (dated 09/25/06) says:
"Please note that what follows is my recounting of a story very recently related to me by the subject, Patrick Byrne, with his permission. I invite Mr. Byrne to follow up with any corrections or clarifications that may be warranted."
A Peek into the Mind of Wikipedia's SlimVirgin (dated 09/27/06) says:
"EDITOR'S NOTE: As I feared, my recollection of Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne's past experiences with Linda Mack (aka SlimVirgin) did not get it quite right.
Byrne recently emailed me a fuller, written version of the story which I intended to add as a comment on the original post; however, due to its length (and quality), I've opted instead to publish it here.
After reading Byrne's account, all I can say is: my version really sucked and you owe it to yourself to read what follows, in its entirety."
Question: Did you lie when you stated on 12/31/06 on InvestorVillage that:
"I am not behind antisocialmedia.com, offer it no support, it has nothing to do with overstock. Technically, I do not "know" who out there is behind it (the person who is behind it has made an effort to shield me from that knowledge), though admittedly, I have a very good idea."
To Patrick Byrne (CEO of Overstock.com), self-proclaimed humble servant and self-proclaimed transparent CEO:
You wrote:
"When I put that out, the shills made a big fuss about a CEO "celebrating" such with the SEC. A year later (this June) the Party Line they were instructed to parrot shifted, and now they were supposed to pretend I hid it."
On May 9, 2006, Overstock.com's 8-K stated:
"On May 9, 2006 the Company issued a press release regarding its receipt of a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office."
You had not yet received your separate SEC subpoena.
Your press release stated:
"Overstock.com Chairman and CEO Patrick Byrne said, 'I may be the first CEO in history to celebrate receiving an SEC subpoena.'"
Afterwards, other filings by Overstock.com with the Securities and Exchange Commission fail to mention your separate SEC subpoena until the 10-Q is issued on May 9, 2007.
Overstock.com's 10-Q stated:
"On May 9, 2006 the Company received a notice of an investigation and subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office. On May 17, 2006, Patrick Byrne also received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office."
Questions: Why did you wait almost an entire year to disclose your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)? Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) an earlier date? When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)? When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)? When did you first discuss your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
Slashdot Mirror
To Patrick Byrne:
- bagley-director-of-communications.html
Title: Judd Bagley, Director of Communications at Overstock.com, stalks a teenaged blogger
Link here: http://whitecollarfraud.blogspot.com/2007/08/judd
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
To Patrick Byrne:
i ck-byrne-ceo-of-overstockcom.html
White Collar Fraud Blog: Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com, Dodges Questions about SEC Subpoenas and Plays Games
Link here: http://whitecollarfraud.blogspot.com/2007/08/patr
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
To Patrick Byrne:
You continue to dodge questions about the SEC subpoenas. You have falsely claimed that "heart of the investigation is not...Overstock-centric."
However, Overstock.com, you, and others working in collusion with you are under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Will you admit that Overstock.com and you are the focus of an investigation by the SEC? Are you afraid to show transparency by answering my questions? Again I ask you to answer the questions below.
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that your press release issued on May 9, 2006 was responding to a personal SEC subpoena that you later received on May 17, 2006?
Is it your position that any person reading your May 9, 2006 press release would have known that you were going to receive a personal SEC subpoena on May 17, 2006?
If it is your position that the May 9, 2006 press release was adequate disclosure of both subpoenas, why did Overstock.com make a disclosure of your personal SEC subpoena about a year later on May 9, 2007?
Is it your position that there are no issues relating to the timing of disclosures by Overstock.com about your personal SEC subpoena?
Do you believe that your public comments on message boards concerning these subpoenas have been consistent with all of Overstock's disclosures in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission?
Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) on an earlier date?
When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did you first discuss your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
If it is your position that there was nothing improper with the delay by Overstock.com in disclosing your personal SEC subpoena, why did the company choose to disclose it at all?
If you truly wish to clear up this issue, why not respond to each of my questions individually in a clear, unambiguous, and truthful manner?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
To Patrick Byrne:
Why are you dodging my questions?
Overstock.com, you, and others working in collusion with you are under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Will you admit that Overstock.com and you are the focus of an investigation by the SEC? Are you afraid to answer questions about the SEC subpoenas?
Therefore, I ask you to answer my questions again.
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that your press release issued on May 9, 2006 was responding to a personal SEC subpoena that you later received on May 17, 2006?
Is it your position that any person reading your May 9, 2006 press release would have known that you were going to receive a personal SEC subpoena on May 17, 2006?
If it is your position that the May 9, 2006 press release was adequate disclosure of both subpoenas, why did Overstock.com make a disclosure of your personal SEC subpoena about a year later on May 9, 2007?
Is it your position that there are no issues relating to the timing of disclosures by Overstock.com about your personal SEC subpoena?
Do you believe that your public comments on message boards concerning these subpoenas have been consistent with all of Overstock's disclosures in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission?
Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) on an earlier date?
When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did you first discuss your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
If it is your position that there was nothing improper with the delay by Overstock.com in disclosing your personal SEC subpoena, why did the company choose to disclose it at all?
If you truly wish to clear up this issue, why not respond to each of my questions individually in a clear, unambiguous, and truthful manner?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
To Patrick Byrne:
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that your press release issued on May 9, 2006 was responding to a personal SEC subpoena that you later received on May 17, 2006?
Is it your position that any person reading your May 9, 2006 press release would have known that you were going to receive a personal SEC subpoena on May 17, 2006?
If it is your position that the May 9, 2006 press release was adequate disclosure of both subpoenas, why did Overstock.com make a disclosure of your personal SEC subpoena about a year later on May 9, 2007?
Is it your position that there are no issues relating to the timing of disclosures by Overstock.com about your personal SEC subpoena?
Do you believe that your public comments on message boards concerning these subpoenas have been consistent with all of Overstock's disclosures in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission?
Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) on an earlier date?
When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did you first discuss your personal SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
If it is your position that there was nothing improper with the delay by Overstock.com in disclosing your personal SEC subpoena, why did the company choose to disclose it at all?
If you truly wish to clear up this issue, why not respond to each of my questions individually in a clear, unambiguous, and truthful manner?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
To Patrick Byrne:
n =2964&pt=msg&mid=1084880
I read Judd Bagley's posts on AntiSocialMedia.net (referenced above by you).
Veni, Vidi, Wiki? (dated 09/25/06) says:
"Please note that what follows is my recounting of a story very recently related to me by the subject, Patrick Byrne, with his permission. I invite Mr. Byrne to follow up with any corrections or clarifications that may be warranted."
A Peek into the Mind of Wikipedia's SlimVirgin (dated 09/27/06) says:
"EDITOR'S NOTE: As I feared, my recollection of Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne's past experiences with Linda Mack (aka SlimVirgin) did not get it quite right.
Byrne recently emailed me a fuller, written version of the story which I intended to add as a comment on the original post; however, due to its length (and quality), I've opted instead to publish it here.
After reading Byrne's account, all I can say is: my version really sucked and you owe it to yourself to read what follows, in its entirety."
Question:
Did you lie when you stated on 12/31/06 on InvestorVillage that:
"I am not behind antisocialmedia.com, offer it no support, it has nothing to do with overstock. Technically, I do not "know" who out there is behind it (the person who is behind it has made an effort to shield me from that knowledge), though admittedly, I have a very good idea."
Link here: http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=3532&m
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)
To Patrick Byrne (CEO of Overstock.com), self-proclaimed humble servant and self-proclaimed transparent CEO:
You wrote:
"When I put that out, the shills made a big fuss about a CEO "celebrating" such with the SEC. A year later (this June) the Party Line they were instructed to parrot shifted, and now they were supposed to pretend I hid it."
On May 9, 2006, Overstock.com's 8-K stated:
"On May 9, 2006 the Company issued a press release regarding its receipt of a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office."
You had not yet received your separate SEC subpoena.
Your press release stated:
"Overstock.com Chairman and CEO Patrick Byrne said, 'I may be the first CEO in history to celebrate receiving an SEC subpoena.'"
Afterwards, other filings by Overstock.com with the Securities and Exchange Commission fail to mention your separate SEC subpoena until the 10-Q is issued on May 9, 2007.
Overstock.com's 10-Q stated:
"On May 9, 2006 the Company received a notice of an investigation and subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office. On May 17, 2006, Patrick Byrne also received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Salt Lake City District Office."
Questions:
Why did you wait almost an entire year to disclose your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
Why didn't Overstock.com disclose your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) an earlier date?
When did each Audit Committee member individually learn about your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did personnel at PriceWaterhouseCoopers learn about your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006)?
When did you first discuss your separate SEC subpoena (received on May 17, 2006) with Overstock.com General Counsel Jonathan Johnson?
Respectfully,
Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO & convicted felon)