Customize

Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

Discussion in 'Senator Xenophon And Scientology' started by BigBeard, Jun 28, 2010.

  1. greebly Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    These currency losses will depend on which cross rate they are against and which balance of cash unless the CoS is trading in options/futures now.

    Secondly the gain/loss during 2008 was minimal due to all other markets excluding the USD.

    Thirdly which amount are they refering to when cash in bank amounts to only nz$300k yet the loss was nz$3million+ and the most income they earnt during 2007 not 08 was 2.6.

    So more importantly what currency loss was this against and if the situation has not been hedged by the CoS mgt in New zealand expect further losses this year and next.

    lol

    At what point will they be selling their assets? sry ideal orgs.

    Please explain to this dumb person:p
  2. greebly Member

  3. greebly Member

  4. anon555 Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    i was wondering about that (and thanks for link sponge)

    I especially like how they claim 17 full time + 844 part time PAID employees yet only have 70K per year salary costs.

    however the real change in their income is "contributions from affiliated organizations" took a nosedive from 2007 to 2008 far in excess of exchange rate problems. Would love to know what that is about.
  5. Anonophunkik Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    I just nosed through this years charity accounts there. According to their accounts they have 17 full time staff and 8 part timers, a total of 25 paid staff. Being a curious chap I just had a look at their wage bill, 70000. Now as a rough guide to how much you may earn as a paid employee I divided 70000 by 25 (I know some are part timers and will earn a little less, and some a little more as they are full time but I wanted a ball park figure.)
    2800 a year!
    Come on, is their a minimum wage law in NZ? or perhaps I just do not understand the accounting method.
  6. adhocrat Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Nah, you caught on real quick there. COS doesn't like to do charitable things, like giving money to poor people or paying wages to their own staff.
  7. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    They sound seriously "Out Exchange". Maybe they're referring to the scilon definition of exchange as opposed to currency exchange?
  8. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    i love you fags

    always on top of this shit, ready to bite the cult in the ass with everything they say
  9. greebly Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Oh there is more to come, still need more folk helping with porject sausagelulz.

    And not much info from exes re the EU court ruling from 2000 sadly:( So if anyone can shed some light on it please do so.
  10. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Why do you think CofS has been willing to spend many Millions of $$$ for out of court settlements if it meant they would have had to "open their books"?

    Why do you think CofS has spent more millions silencing any Top Level Execs, especially those on finance lines, for lawyers, private investigators, OSA, etc.?

    Why do you think CofS spent millions on hundreds of lawsuits against the IRS in order to deplete the IRS litigation budget as well as every fairgame dirty trick against individual IRS agents, judges, and politicians?

    While some say Hubbard was a brilliant con man, my research has lead me to believe that he was mentally ill and that was the basis of all his legal and money problems.

    Scientology was never anything more than Hubbard's solution to his never ending legal and money problems. As it began, so it will end.
  11. anonhuff Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Pretty sure I heard the chair state several times that those speaking would be allowed further submission.

    That leaves some room for the speakers yesterday and the day prior, not sure about anybody else.
  12. PodPeople Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    This has been confirmed by those that spoke.
  13. Sponge Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Well whatever it is, it kinda just doesn't look right on its face.

    When Xenophon was taking about the huge discrepency in income totals, that is all he was talking about. He didn't even mention expenditure. It was Ferris that inferred the "exchange rates" variance from 2007 to 2008 that you see in the expenditure section in the accounts as "exchange losses". All I can think is if the value of their cash on hand surplus in their base banking currency from 2007 was worth less due to exchange rates which they then claim for in the 2008 year [?] (don't ask me to explain because I'm winging it here). However, the accumulated funds at the end of 2007/start of 2008 is only 2,402,416 surplus, so how do you contrive 3,164,889 "exchange losses" from a smaller amount? Did they change their base banking currency to Rai Stones or something?
    I dunno maybe some accountant will slap me and explain it all in simple terms.
  14. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    I'm much encouraged learning Senator Eggelston's background and experience.
    His questions were exacting and to the point. With all the prior submissions at hand, and additional submissions I am assuming will be put forth, there's a great possibility he will be quite able to see "clearly", unlike the Otee's in the back row.
  15. Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    The discrepancy is due to the flow uplines, IMO.

    Sending cash back to the US has been a money-laundering trick of theirs for years. This may or may nit be vlmpounded by the Flag Banking Officers demanding an ever-larger share of the pie because Davey needs a new suit.
  16. anonhuff Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    They exchanged money with mothership and got nothing in return. Therefore, stick it in the losses column. That's how scientology does accounting.

    edit: or maybe, and this makes more sense to me, they went to the bank, exchanged one money for another and took a little bit of a loss in the exchange, then sensing something wasn't right they did this over and over until they were out 3.1 million of their local currency
  17. anon555 Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    there is something odd about those numbers, exchange losses should only occur with [STRIKE]companies[/STRIKE] organizations doing international business (trading in foreign currency in particular, or buying/selling assets overseas)

    Not sure (its been a few years since I took any accounting) but I'd bet the number is related to the $3mill increase in liabilities from 2007-2008, however there was virtually no change in fixed assets (if they had bought a building it would show up there). im guessing it has something to do with its relationship to the mother church (I have a hard time keeping track of all these money siphoning activities) how else to you accidentally end up owing an extra $3mill with nothing to show for it.
  18. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    haha. A "flow" uplines. Sounds so lofty, as well as voluntary, which of course it never is. Mandatory. Believe the relevant saying is, All Roads Lead To Rome.

    I can tell you Sea Org's had to "flow" around 80% of gross income to GO (Guardian's Office, now OSA) and that goes way back. And this was back before the massive IAS coercions for $$$.

    I might also point out that recently new laws in the U.S. went into effect with some teeth in them regarding attempts of offshore tax havens.
  19. Sponge Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Well if that's the case they "flowed uplines" (3,164,889) more than what they started the year with in accumulated surplus (2,402,416), and by the end of 2008 they were left with almost -NZ$1million (yes that's minus i.e accumulated deficit)

    Reminder: Keep an eye on the NZ charities commission website
    http://www.register.charities.govt.nz/CharitiesRegister/Search.aspx
    I don't expect the 2009 accounts to appear on the website on or immediately after today's due date 30/06/2010 even if they have them (simply due to administration delays) but a "concerned New Zealander" might want to ask (considering the interest generated by the AU senate committee hearings).
  20. moreanonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    How about, post when there's something worth posting?
  21. greebly Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    K got bored while waiting for mkts so.

    If they had a "borrowing" as COSRECI used to and still does with other "entities" and this was reflected in USD.

    Then due to credit crunch the NZD moved 35% 1.28 -1.73 then the exchange loss could be related to a borrowing of around 9million and therefore apply loss in exhchange rates of around 3.15million.

    Can't see any outstanding "charges" or "mortages" on the charity website dox unless someone can get dox elsewhere.

    This is normally reported under IAS 23 or if a "transaction" IAS 21.

    Therefore for 08-09 numbers you should show a "exchange gain" of around 2.5million as the world currencies started to return to normal.

    Now if hedged correctly none of this would have happened. But there you go.

    Currently thier liabilities are larger than all assets inclusive of the "exchange" fluctuations.
  22. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Did you bake those lamos?
  23. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Should that be "lammos", otherwise it might sound like lame-o's.
  24. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    I Love it when you talk dirty finance.
    Even though I don't understand a damn word of it,
    I have a tingling sensation that in the end, I'll be happy dancing.
  25. Sponge Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Another way of presenting New Zealand Scientology's accumulated funds totals, for the lulz .....

    Before Anonymous: $2,402,416
    After Anonymous: -$999,583
  26. Rockyj Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing


    I too appreciate all involved keeping us posted, & commentaries before vids are up. AND I'm really grateful for your Vimeo vids as I can view them @ work (don't tell my boss), opps I'm the boss!
    :rolleyes:
  27. anon555 Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    or in the words of senator cameron: " is there any link between that drop in income and having to report to the charities commission"

    followed by cameron laughing at the exchange rate explanation


    for those who didnt watch all the videos

    here (at about 5:50):
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydBeiIAQMRE&feature=related]YouTube - CoS (4/9) Scientology and Senator Xenophon's Public Benefit Test Proposal[/ame]
  28. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Followed by yet another Comical Relief Note:

    Neither Marty nor his Posse have mentioned a word about the Australian Inquiry.

    hahahahaha
  29. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    NZ dollar fluctuations over this period were basically US dollar fluctuations - against European currencies the NZ dollar has basically gotten stronger and stronger over the period. And NZD and AUD have not drifted that far relative to each other.

    So - if they did their accounts at the 'worst' possible date,
    2008 - NZD 1.00 = USD 0.82 (1.22:1.00)
    2009 - NZD 1.00 = USD 0.50 (2.00:1.00)

    So a loss of NZD 3,160,000 due to exchange rate fluctuations could result from (for example) a transaction in the United States involving a LIABILITY held by the New Zealand entity which had a value of around USD 4,000,000]

    EG: NZ cult owes US cult
    USD 4,000,000 = NZD 4,800,000 2008
    USD 4,000,000 = NZD 8,000,000 2009

    Difference in increased LIABILITY due to currency fluctuations is 3,200,000.

    This could be money lent to the NZ cult to help buy 138 Grafton Road in early 2008 (for example)
  30. anonhuff Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    no
    \
    danza1.jpg
  31. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Need to find out the date they (NZ) purchased Grafton Road. I'm pretty sure it was 2008, but it shows up in BOTH the 31 Dec 2007 AND the 31 Dec 2008 accounts.

    (Reported purchase price was 10,000,000 NZD)
  32. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    On the subject of contempt.

    This would require
    1) Documented evidence of the precise statement made (eg, quote, attribution, and video reference with time)
    2) Documented evidence that the statement is provably false
    3) Reasonable evidence that the person making the statement knew it was false.

    In the first instance, someone keen should trawl through the video noting statements which are probably false, post them somewhere here, and then folk can go to work collecting evidence that they are untrue.

    I think the fair game one would be almost impossible to prove (unless there is video of her talking about it, or multiple people who will swear statements regarding times when she did)

    Mike Ferris is telling the truth when he says the NZ books are open - they are online on the Charities Commission website (well, FY 2008 is).

    I'm not hopeful, but it would be interesting to see what other statements were made that could be used.
  33. Sponge Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    No, the other guy, sitting in between Ferris and Louise the batty barrister, was talking about the books for Australia. On questioning by Xenophon about proof, with receipts, the guy said their books are open and he would provide them to the inquiry. If they start making excuses and don't make them available or don't provide receipts of crucial transactions behind the balance sheet figures then that could possibly be contempt.
  34. DeathHamster Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

  35. Anonymous Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Thanks - could'a saved myself $8 on the title search I just requested. :-/
  36. greebly Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing


    But those accounts do not stipulate the exchange loss and wether it is IAS 21 or 23.

    A public traded company has to inform the public of those beyond it's basic headline accounts.

    This is where transparency falls down.

    We could ask them but they would not be obligated to as Mr Tommy Davis made it clear.
  37. Sponge Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Do that again for 2007 - 2008 because that's the years shown on the balance sheet.

    Also, don't double-up. Increased liabilities totals for the end of 2008 compared to 2007 includes those very exchange losses.
    Basically there is no indication on the balance sheet of what it actually pertains to. IMO their should be an attached explanatory sheet showing some detail in view of the relatively huge sum involved.
  38. RightOn Member

  39. Sponge Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    Neither do I.
    :)
  40. RightOn Member

    Re: Public Benefit Test - Day 2 Hearing

    lol Sponge!
    But you must agree it is sexy hawt

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins