ASC

Brawmethius

I mean fair analysis, sure people will rage about unsustainability its dumb where dahhh money. But they are ignoring the current cycle the market and hyperscalers have latched on to, they can convert CAPEX spend to their reported revenue. ASC 606 baby. Not going to get into the weeds of that or if pro/against, but it is the mechanism at play. Now imagine you are a comapny, you can raise debt, sepnd CAPEX and book large chunks of that as revenue. what do you do? Well you spend as much CAPEX as you possibly can using other peoples money (in this case equity investors).

elgrandorado

Switching costs for surgeons is like pulling their teeth out. Having worked with a CMO at a medical device firm and seeing how surgeons deal with products, I feel like more fickle customers don't exist. Once you evangelize them, it's a life long contract with the surgeon and the hospital/ASC/clinic.

Brawmethius

Both these examples suck because unless one party increases the payment amount it balances out on the books as expense. This would be like I take a stake in your wheat farm and in exchange for that stake in your wheat farm it gives you the right to buy wheat from my farm. You buy wheat from my wheat farm and I book that as revenue, because the wheat investors see so much wheat money moving around and I've established a market price through my investment in your wheat farm, they start investing in wheat farms. This investment influx is used to buy more wheat between us and I report my investment has appreciated due to the stamped to buy wheat farms, making investors more excited and more money flows in. All this inflow is used to buy more wheat from my wheat farm, which I then continue to invest in other wheat farms, who buy my wheat. All the while the local baker wonders why everyone is so excited about wheat all of a sudden as he isn't buying anymore wheat. It is not just cash being traded back and forth, that is actually how the real economy works and accounting/reporting covers this with it being treated as expenses or operating costs. So no new value added in the exchange of goods is noticed. What we are doing here is converting equity positions into revenue streams through something called ASC 606. Which is how it shows up on the balance sheets and books as actual revenue. Thank you for coming to my wheat talk.

Leading-Equal204

Yeah this is the part of the print nobody on CNBC will run with. ASC 321 mark to market on equity stakes flows straight through GAAP net income, so you can have a quarter where reported EPS looks like a blowout but operating cash flow tells a different story. I learned this the hard way watching SoftBank back in 2021. Anyone modeling GOOGL and AMZN should be on op income ex 'other income' or just FCF. The Anthropic mark inflates earnings until it doesn't, and then the comp gets ugly.

Brawmethius

Word salad there dog. First time reading ASC 606 or asking an ai slop to explain is my guess. No worries at least you trying. Its recognized as its consumed, the investment cost does not show up on the balance sheet directly. Will be buried in COGS and it does not book as a liability bit a RPO. Specifically what you are misunderstanding is that the credits are non-cash considerations, they do not reduce recognize revenue, and they are not material rights as it was equity exchange up front which just makes it contractual performance obligation. You are correct that it is only recognized as revenue as output (when its used).

outphase84

ASC 606 would require output based revenue recognition, and the credits themselves would reduce the recognized revenue, because they’re recognized as material rights under the equity arrangement.

CannaVestments

During the quarter, prior to the rescheduling news, we completed a routine tax review with external counsel based on new information that came to light in which we determined that certain tax positions in previous years met the more likely than not standard required under ASC 740. This conclusion allowed us to release a significant portion of our previously recorded tax reserves and accrued interest from our balance sheet. These positions will also reduce our uncertain tax position liabilities going forward. Separately, following the Treasury and IRS guidance on medical cannabis rescheduling, we expect to recognize additional 280E tax benefit in future periods. Comments from the call

Brawmethius

ASC 606 You can believe what ever reddit vibes you are on or you can believe actual accounting rules.

TherealCarbunc

Sounds like you also struggle to understand GAAP accounting or use its complexities to push your own narrative. Still push for it to be treated purely as a legacy bank as well. Under ASC 730, the vast majority of ongoing tech R&D must be expensed as incurred, not capitalized and amortized 9 consecutive quarts of GAAP profitbility, 18 quarters of meets or beats guidance. OCC and SEC regulated. They were a student loan lender prior to 2021 - they didn't get their bank charter until 2022. Audited by Deloite, Goldman and Bank of America with Tier-1 equity purchasers at $27.5 I'll give them more credence, good luck with the puts.

ai-moderator

#TLDR --- Ticker: SOFI Direction: Down Prognosis: Buy Puts / Short Accounting Status: Sus AF GAAP Compliance: 404 Not Found **Summary:** OP breaks down how SoFi is allegedly violating a very straightforward GAAP rule (ASC 820-10-50-2(c)) by hiding the explicit breakdown between *realized* and *unrealized* (model-based) gains on their fair value adjustments. By lumping everything into one aggregated "Impact on Earnings" column, SoFi makes it impossible for investors to see if their internal models are artificially inflating asset values with "paper gains" to mask actual, realized cash losses. While rising interest rates have crushed the market value of US Treasuries and loans held by other major banks, SoFi’s models magically show their loans maintaining a premium. Add in mysteriously negative net servicing income and plunging loan sales, and OP suspects SoFi is using accounting aggregation to bury overvalued assets. If SoFi simply complied with the SEC/GAAP disclosure rule, it would end the debate—but it might also prove the Muddy Waters short report was right all along.

oksono

> Wrong. Cite the GAAP then. Hedge contracts are required to be carried at fair value. Electing to apply hedge accounting and complicated designation is optional. “ASC 815-10-05-4: This Topic requires that an entity recognize derivative instruments, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, as assets or liabilities in the statement of financial position and measure them at fair value. If certain conditions are met, **an entity may elect**, under this Topic, to designate a derivative instrument in any one of the following ways: (a) **A hedge** of the exposure to changes in the fair value of a recognized asset or liability, or of an unrecognized firm commitment, that are attributable to a particular risk (referred to as a fair value hedge) (b) **A hedge** of the exposure to variability in the cash flows of a recognized asset or liability, or of a forecasted transaction, that is attributable to a particular risk (referred to as a cash flow hedge) (c) **A hedge** of the foreign currency exposure”

AzureLainCapital

Into the dollars potentially. Id send an image of my Ai to take up less space but cannot post images. **Where TXTM sits today under GAAP:** TXTM is a US domiciled company filing under US GAAP. Under GAAP ASC 905 — agricultural accounting — biological assets like seeds are recorded at **historical cost**. Dr. J donated the original seeds at $1/seed. Multiplication yields from the grower are recorded at $0 because no cost was incurred to produce them. Result: 1.25 billion seeds sitting on the books at approximately **$505 million.** That's what the market currently sees. **The IFRS switch — why it changes everything:** IFRS IAS 41 — the international biological asset accounting standard — requires biological assets be marked to **fair value** at every reporting period regardless of what was originally paid for them. TXTM cannot use IFRS on a US exchange as a US domiciled company. So the plan is to **redomicile** — move the company's legal home outside the US — becoming a Foreign Private Issuer. Foreign Private Issuers are explicitly accepted by the SEC filing under IFRS. More importantly JSE and LSE are both IFRS native exchanges that require it. The moment redomicile completes and IFRS audits are filed — the balance sheet transforms. Seeds stop being recorded at historical cost and get marked to independently verified fair value. **The $2.17 thesis — current seed inventory:** A third party commissioned valuation established **$15.26/seed** fair value in 2024. Deloitte is currently engaged to independently validate the enterprise value — providing Big 4 credibility to that number. 1,250,000,000 seeds × $15.26 = **$19,075,000,000** $19,075,000,000 ÷ 8,791,221,631 shares = **$2.17 per share** From current price of $0.00875 that is a **247x return.** This is seeds only. No revenue. No technology. No RWA infrastructure. No carbon credits. No bonds. Just the existing seed inventory marked to fair value under IFRS divided by shares outstanding. **The $4.60 thesis — full multiplication delivery:** The seed multiplication agreement requires the grower to return 4x what was sent. 600 million seeds were sent in April 2025. 1 billion were returned in June 2025. **1.4 billion seeds are still contractually owed.** When delivered: 1,250,000,000 current + 1,400,000,000 owed = **2,650,000,000 total seeds** 2,650,000,000 × $15.26 = **$40,439,000,000** $40,439,000,000 ÷ 8,791,221,631 shares = **$4.60 per share** From current price that is a **526x return.** Again — seeds only. Nothing else included. Lets use the $2 share example, even if you discounted that by 75% that share price would still be Way higher than the current .008 (pre institutions, Pre uplist).

Leon2060

There are different accounting rules for the buy/hold side of derivatives. You can’t just mark to market, every single hedge you buy you have to walk through ASC 815 and determine if it is a “highly effective hedge”. Fuel hedges aren’t considered fair value hedges for airlines. They are considered cash flow hedges under ASC 815 so mark to market isn’t really relevant. In terms of why it costs too much. Fuel is relatively stable all things considered. When it pops, it usually goes up significantly and there is only so much you can spend to protect against those random events. Fuel is also the equal playing field in the airline industry. Everyone is subject to basically the same thing. After decades of hedging everyone determined it wasn’t providing any benefit and it was just resulting in an extra cost. Airlines basically make no profit so extra costs are cut aggressively. Biggest investor metric for airlines is EBITDAR and casm-ex. You legit adjust cost per seat mile by backing out fuel expense which tells you truly how airlines are operating their business independent of fuel. I also used to audit some massive companies and they had all terminated their hedging programs for copper and other precious metals. I think it’s dying out across the board.

King_Chron

**------. Liabilities "Under the Hood": The Forensic Reality** The $137.8M in GAAP total liabilities, plus $14.7M in Series B mezzanine equity sitting above that line, brings the full economic liability stack to approximately $152.6M against $202.6M in total assets — a leverage ratio that is the primary driver of MariMed's distressed valuation. But a line-by-line decomposition reveals that the composition of this stack matters as much as its size, and that significant portions carry either non-cash characteristics, long-dated maturities, or direct regulatory optionality. **280E Tax Payable ($26.98M — Highest Binary Optionality)** The single largest current liability on the balance sheet is $26.98M in income taxes payable, up from $21.9M at year-end 2024 — a $5.1M YoY increase that reflects continued 280E accrual under federal cannabis scheduling. At 3.04x cash on hand ($8.9M), this liability is the most acute overhang on the stock, but it is also the most asymmetric. Should cannabis be rescheduled to Schedule III, this accrual does not represent a cash payment owed for normal business activity — it represents a regulatory artifact that could be materially restructured. No other line item on MariMed's balance sheet carries this kind of event-driven resolution potential. **Debt Stack ($72.7M total notes — Quality Over Quantity)** Long-term mortgages and notes payable stand at $70.2M, with a current-portion of $2.6M — implying minimal near-term principal pressure. The 10-K confirms the debt is predominantly secured real estate mortgage debt across Illinois, Delaware, and Massachusetts properties, carrying rates in the 8–9% range. This is collateralized, asset-backed financing, not the predatory 14–18% unsecured working capital notes that have destroyed equity value across the sector. The current portion of just $2.6M represents a debt service coverage profile that is manageable relative to the company's $16.9M adjusted EBITDA. **Lease Liabilities ($12.6M total — Structural, Not Distress)** Under ASC 842, MariMed carries $8.6M in operating lease liabilities ($2.0M current / $6.6M long-term) and $4.0M in finance lease liabilities ($2.1M current / $2.0M long-term). Combined, these represent $12.6M in total lease obligations. These are non-debt, contractual obligations tied to operating facilities — they are a fixed cash drag, but they are also the cost of the physical infrastructure generating the revenue. There is no covenant risk, no acceleration risk, and no refinancing event associated with these obligations. **Series B Restructuring ($14.7M — Near-Term Risk Extinguished)** The $14.7M Series B Convertible Preferred Stock, classified in mezzanine equity, was the most acute near-term liquidity risk on the capital structure. The mandatory conversion deadline of February 28, 2026 had functioned as a hard clock on management's balance sheet flexibility. The March 2, 2026 restructuring agreement eliminated that deadline and replaced it with a package of long-dated instruments extending the weighted average maturity by 4.6 years. The result: no material debt or preferred equity maturity for the foreseeable future. As CFO Mario Pinho noted in the earnings release, MariMed now operates with "a clean balance sheet that contains no material debt maturities in the near-term." **Residual Current Liabilities ($25.5M — Operational, Not Structural)** The remaining current liability stack — $14.6M accounts payable, $9.5M accrued expenses, $1.4M deferred revenue — is ordinary operating accrual. Accounts payable of $14.6M against $159.8M in revenue implies a payable days ratio of roughly 33 days, which is tight and operationally healthy. The $9.5M jump in accrued expenses versus $4.4M at year-end 2024 warrants monitoring in Q1 2026 disclosures but does not indicate structural impairment. **Net Assessment** Strip out the 280E tax liability and the lease obligations — both non-debt items with specific resolution pathways — and MariMed's true financial debt load is approximately $72.7M against $89.4M in net PP&E alone. The liability stack is not clean, but it is not the existential threat the headline number implies. The risk is concentrated in one line item — the 280E accrual — and that risk is more a function of federal cannabis policy than of operational performance.

Subject-Draw-7076

From corporate finance side - GAAP is already slowly moving from rules based to principle based. As europe moved to IFRS which is insanely principles based (from someone with a long history of USGAAP). 2014-2016 had ASC606 and other principle based standards. Europe has largely moved to IFRS and many are moving to semi-annual reporting (moreso in certain industries). The principles based and not every quarter has been a petri dish to watch. Auditors still need to sign-off, regulators still need to regulate, but this isn't some crazy maverick trump bullshit- Public companies and the reporting required is expensive and rigorous.

Organic-Lie4759

Used to cycle trade ASC for years, had to quit cause the damn price went to 15 and just stayed there, no more 8-15 runs

Organic-Lie4759

Sucks because for the last few years I buy ASC shares this time of year cause the price normally dips down around 8 bucks or so... This year it's ATH with the Hormuz closed. Fahk moi.

Torontocomedian

I’m looking into AAPPTEC they are leading innovation on peptide synthesis which is projected to be a huge market, here’s what I got so far: AAPPTEC is currently leading the manufacturing process in a new peptide synthesis technology (SPPS), there are others doing the same but since this is the only company unaffected by tariffs other being (“GNTX” sourcing china, “J&J” sourcing from PEPTICOM in Israel). AAPPTEC is however privately owned at the moment, but received a big investment from TCP Analytical, 7 months ago, which is also privately funded, but did receive funding from AUDAX Private Equity 10 months ago. See article: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250325592060/en/TCP-Analytical-Welcomes-New-Investment-from-Audax-Strategic-Capital-ASC-and-Other-Investors-Alongside-Expanded-Commitment-from-Existing-Sponsor-Riverarch-Equity-Partners I looked into the top 5 publically traded companies involved in peptides, three of which are traded on NYSE. ThermoFisher, Agilent, and Novo. There is a precedent where AUDAX has sold CorEvitas to ThermoFisher for 900M. The way I see it is TCP is fattening itself up for an A&M by one of the three mentioned, or they’ll IPO early next year.

Acceptable-Squash491

I think you need to read ASC 820 🤷

luvinbc

Have a look at DRS- Leonardo DRS, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, provides defense electronic products and systems, and military support services worldwide. It operates through Advanced Sensing and Computing and Integrated Mission Systems segments. The ASC segment designs, develops, and manufacture sensing and network computing technology that enables real-time situational awareness required for enhanced operational decision making and execution; and offers sensing capabilities span applications, such as missions requiring advanced detection, precision targeting and surveillance sensing, long range electro-optic/infrared, signals intelligence, and other intelligence systems including electronic warfare, ground vehicle sensing, active electronically scanned array tactical radars, dismounted soldier, and space sensing.

Holla_Ackbar

It must so obviously be debt that the SEC and FASB never even considered it debt on the balance sheet for the last 50 years, and just recently made the accounting change in 2020. (ASC Leases 842)

NicoDiPlaza

Recent news for FY26 CMS is gradually moving a large share of musculoskeletal and spine procedures off the “inpatient‑only” list and onto outpatient and ASC schedules, so more of these cases can be done as same‑day or short‑stay in lower‑cost settings instead of requiring a full hospital admission just to meet coverage rules. Orthobiologics are a natural fit for this shift because they promote fusion and healing with biologic grafts and matrices that work well in minimally invasive procedures, add minimal operating time, and avoid the large hardware constructs that often keep patients in the hospital longer. As more spine and musculoskeletal cases migrate into outpatient and ASC environments under the new CMS rules, the case mix increasingly favors techniques where biologics can show their value without inpatient “overhead,” leaving orthobiologics structurally better aligned with the same‑day/short‑stay model than traditional, hardware‑heavy approaches.

Calm_Evening_4534

1. The Bomb: The 2008 "DTA" Legacy During the 2008 financial crisis, Citi lost tens of billions of dollars. In the world of accounting, a loss isn't just "gone"—it creates a Net Operating Loss (NOL). Citi was allowed to keep these losses on their books as Deferred Tax Assets (DTAs), essentially a promise from the government: "Whenever you eventually make money again, you don't have to pay taxes until you've used up these old losses."  • The Problem: As of late 2025, Citi is still carrying roughly $25–$28 billion in these tax assets. • The "Regulatory Weight": Regulators (under Basel III) hate DTAs because you can't use a "tax promise" to pay back depositors during a bank run. Therefore, if the DTA gets too big relative to the bank's actual cash (Equity), regulators force the bank to deduct it from their capital. 2. The Fuse: The Credit Card Portfolio Citi is one of the world’s largest credit card issuers. This is their "high-yield" engine, but it’s also the most sensitive to economic heat. • The Burn Rate: Currently, Citi’s credit card loss rates are "normal" (around 3.5%–4.0%).  • The Heat: If unemployment (U-6) spikes to 9% or 10%, that "burn rate" accelerates. This is the fuse. As long as the economy is cool, the fuse just smolders. But if defaults jump toward 8% or 10%, the fuse starts racing toward the main charge. 3. The Detonator: The "Valuation Allowance" (Note 9) This is the mechanical link that turns a "bad year" into a "blown-up bank." Accounting rules (ASC 740) state that if a company thinks it is "more likely than not" that they won't be profitable enough to use their DTAs, they must trigger a Valuation Allowance.  The Detonation Sequence: 1. Stage 1: 20% of credit card users default (The Fuse reaches the end). Or PE unravels, or some other black swan event takes place. 2. Stage 2: Citi reports a massive $30B quarterly loss. 3. Stage 3 (The Detonator): Because of that massive loss, accountants are forced to say, "We clearly aren't profitable right now, so we must write down the value of our $28B in DTAs." 4. Stage 4 (The Explosion): Citi takes a non-cash charge to "Note 9." This doesn't just lower earnings; it vaporizes regulatory capital (CET1). 4. Why the Bomb Destroys the Stock When that DTA "detonator" goes off, Citi’s Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio—their ultimate safety metric—would likely plummet from 13.2% to below 8% in a single day. • Automatic Halts: At that level, the Fed legally must stop Citi from paying dividends or buying back shares. • The "Death Spiral": The market sees the capital hole and realizes Citi needs to raise cash. But no one wants to buy stock in a failing bank, so the stock price collapses from $111 toward $30 strike price as investors flee. • Insolvency: If the write-down is big enough, the bank becomes "technically insolvent," meaning its liabilities outweigh its actual usable capital.

SpongEWorTHiebOb

Ever hear of ASC 606?

Th121994

I am nog sure how that would work under US GAAP. In the Netherlands above a certain ownership percentage (+50%) it is possible for mother companies to consolidate earnings of their subsidiairies. ChatGPT indicates a same percentage of ownership in US (ASC 810).

Full-Discussion3745

The 10-K disclosures you mentioned do technically include climate-related risks, but that’s the problem, they’re written broadly enough to meet accounting compliance without acknowledging known internal data. Under ASC 450, Exxon only needs to disclose quantifiable losses when they’re “likely” and “estimable,” but under SEC Rule 10b-5, the standard for material risk is any known trend reasonably likely to affect future financial performance. Exxon’s internal climate models, confirmed in the 2023 Harvard study and earlier InsideClimate investigations, projected measurable effects on asset valuation, decommissioning costs, and reserve pricing well before those were reflected in their filings. The issue isn’t that they omitted the term “climate change,” but that they described it as a generic external factor rather than a modeled, internal financial risk. A stronger disclosure would have directly connected those internal model findings to asset impairment assumptions and long-term pricing risk, rather than treating them as hypothetical. That difference isn’t semantic , it’s the line between compliance and misrepresentation.

last_dance_dan

bro they were out early with ER it was dog shit Net revenue is expected to be approximately $70 million for the three months ended September 27, 2025, which is in line with the Company’s previous guidance range of $68 million to $73 million. •Gross margin is expected to be in the range of approximately 10% to 11% for the three months ended September 27, 2025, inclusive of approximately $1.7 million of expenses related to the suspension and substantial cessation of operational activities in China. Excluding these charges, gross margin is expected to be in the range of approximately 12% to 13%. •Operating expenses are expected to be in the range of approximately $41 million to $43 million for the three months ended September 27, 2025, inclusive of approximately $2 million of charges related to certain non-routine items, including incremental legal expenses associated with a contractual dispute with a former co-manufacturer, amortization of certain retention program expenses and costs related to a partial lease termination of a portion of the Company’s campus headquarters building. Excluding these charges, operating expenses are expected to be in the range of approximately $39 million to $41 million. •In addition to and not included in the preliminary estimates above, **the Company expects to record a non-cash impairment charge for the three months ended September 27, 2025, related to certain of its long-lived assets.** The Company’s recoverability test, conducted in accordance with ASC 360, preliminarily indicated that the carrying amount of certain of its long-lived assets was not recoverable from the projected undiscounted future cash flows of the relevant asset group. Although the impairment charge is expected to be material, the Company is not yet able to reasonably quantify the amount at this time.

AsbestosDude

Im not speaking or acting as a registered professional, neither am I representing anyone. There is absolutely no reasonable pathway where anything I say here would ever circle back to me. Youre clueless if you think my regulator would ever follow up with anything posted on reddit in this fashion. Let alone revoke my license for telling someone to dump their calls for cash and stock. But please, educate me more on securities laws you clearly dont understand. In fact ill tell you exactly who to talk to. Go report me to CIRO, OFSI, and the ASC. I'll wait.

Bunker58

It is. Read ASC 350-40 which addresses the capitalization of software costs.

Gloomy_MTTime420

Hey don’t tell anyone…since we all probably missed the $BMNR move ;) ===== I found this in the 7/2/25 $BMNR filing: - https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1829311/000168316825004889/bitmine_i10q-053125.htm Revenue from leasing arrangement During the three months ended May 31, 2025 we entered into two machine leasing agreements with KULR Technology Group, Inc. (“KULR” or the “Lessee”). See Note 8. KULR Agreements. Under the terms of these agreement we leased 3,000 ASIC miners to KULR. Since KULR had control of the ASIC miners during the term of the leases. We met our performance requirement under the guidelines of ASC 606 by ensuring that machines were operating at 99% of capacity throughout the lease term. Cost of sales related to this lease revenue was calculated based on costs directly related to operating the 3,000 miners. During the three months ended May 31, 2025 we generated $1,074,561 in lease revenue with $685,924 in leasing cost of sales.

AmbitiousEconomics

Well is the question about warrants or convertible debt? Reading the lawsuit I see >Then, on March 25, 2025, the BigBear.ai class action lawsuit further alleges that BigBear.ai filed its 2024 Form 10-K, disclosing that a “conversion option embedded within the 2026 Notes was incorrectly deemed to be eligible for a scope exception from the bifurcation requirements of ASC 815-15 and therefore requires bifurcation as a derivative (‘2026 Notes Conversion Option’)” and that “[t]he 2026 Notes include certain adjustments to the conversion rate that violate the ‘fixed-for-fixed’ criteria described in [ASC] 815-40.” As a result, the consolidated financial statements were restated “to reflect the issuance of the 2026 Notes Conversion Option at fair value as of December 7, 2021 and the subsequent remeasurement to fair value at each reporting date,” according to the complaint. Which actually suggests that they were not doing enough subtracting from revenue, as the debt was a convertible note, not a warrant, but they treated it as a warrant.

callmecrude

It’s literally right in the 10-Q as a liquidity concern. > The company expects that its current operating forecast over the next twelve months will allow the company to maintain operations and meet its obligations to customers, vendors and employees in the ordinary course of business. However, due to the Company’s ongoing consideration of an in-court restructuring that could result in an event of default during the implementation of that potential solution, management has concluded that there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern as of the issuance date, in accordance with the requirements of ASC 205-40, “Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern.” Again, redditors never seem to actually understand the financial statements they reference, so I’ll make it clear that this isn’t a statement most companies make. This is a required statement that Wolfspeed is forced to make because their accountants have flagged that there is a very real chance that the company goes bankrupt. It’s not “my facts.” This is literally an SEC requirement that’s meant to help protect investors, and you’ve completely ignored it in your DD.

careyectr

• Deferred tax assets/liabilities are accounting, not cash, items • Deferred tax assets (DTAs) arise when companies expect to pay less tax in the future (e.g. from net operating loss carryforwards). • Deferred tax liabilities (DTLs) arise when companies expect to pay more tax in the future (e.g. from accelerated depreciation). • These are timing differences under FASB’s ASC 740—ultimately settled in cash when the underlying items reverse. • TCJA forced a “re-value” of all DTAs/DTLs in 2017 • When the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut the federal corporate rate from 35% to 21%, companies had to re-measure every deferred balance at the new rate in the period of enactment . • For firms with net DTLs, the lower rate meant those liabilities shrank—so they booked a one-time tax benefit, boosting reported 2017 earnings  • That one-time boost didn’t create actual tax payments • This is purely an accounting adjustment, not cash collected by the IRS. • Real government revenue comes from current tax liabilities, not deferred items • What really drove down U.S. corporate tax receipts was the lower statutory rate • In FY 2018 actual corporate income tax receipts were about $135 billion below pre-TCJA CBO projections—almost exactly a 40% drop consistent with the rate cut . • Over FY 2018–2027 the TCJA’s business provisions are expected to reduce federal revenues by roughly $919 billion . • Conclusion: it’s a valid earnings-quality concern, but not a deferred-tax revenue grab • Yes, many companies looked profitable in 2017 because of that one-time deferred-tax benefit. • However, that benefit didn’t send extra dollars to the Treasury—it merely reshuffled accounting values • The sharp drop in actual corporate tax revenue stems from the permanent cut to the tax rate, not the deferred-tax revaluation.

fly_awayyy

Forget ASC 606. Go back and look at their reports from their financials. That’s factual not BS lol. Who do you think pays suppliers for parts delivered for a plane that’s gets assembled but they can’t change hands/ deliver in almost 2 years??

Fair_Half7672

ASC 606 when live in 2018 and the entire revenue recognition standard changed. You couldn't have made a more inaccurate statement and a great example of how people spew out BS when they have no clue what they are talking about.

Notmanynamesleftnow

Not really the same thing here - under GAAP investments in securities (unless held to maturity) and equity investments, as well as derivatives, loans held for sale, and other similar balance are “marked to market” and recorded at fair value. However, depending on the nature of those assets m, or liabilities in some cases, (e.g. cash flow edge vs fair value hedge, AFS vs Trading Securities) - the change may be recorded on the income statement (impacting profit / net income, such as the bitcoin case) or the statement of other comprehensive income, not impacting profit. In Enrons case - it wasn’t “mark to market” accounting that was the root issue, it was their fraudulent manipulation of fair value (mtm) estimates and off balance sheet entities that were the main issues and led to its collapse. For example (among other things) they improperly applied MTM accounting to long term energy contracts, and booked future profits in the current period despite variability and cash flows not coming for years. They also didn’t later adjust earnings downward if those projections were wrong. That was fraud, not an issue with the accounting rules themselves. The FASB did reform mark-to-market rules (FAS 157 —> ASC 820) after Enron as well as SPE/Off Balance Sheet rules (FAS 140 —> ASC 810 and 860) to eliminate off balance sheet hiding and clarify the hierarchy of how fair value estimates should be applied to mitigate Companies making fraudulent estimates like Enron did. ASC 606 also created stricter and more consistent rules on long term contract revenue recognition. But the rules themselves were not the issue and operated largely fine prior to this. These changes just helped ensure consistency of application across all industries / companies and made it harder for a Company to hide this kind of fraud in the future.

denrattavagen

**Math and Analysis Corrections** Your calculations miss: * Market maker hedging requirements * Institutional positioning impact * Convert note mechanics * Float dynamics **Capital Structure** Your "pyramid" interpretation ignores: * Strategic timing of raises * Professional execution * Clean balance sheet * Market structure development **Business Analysis** Regarding software business claims: * Misrepresented Q3 figures * Ignored ASC350 accounting impact * Missed January 2025 fair value transition * Overlooked core business stability (2/4)

Father_of_Lies666

I’d put some in a target fund like RCS that pays high divs, some specific high div payers like SIRI, KO, ADM, ASC, and AGI. You take a million there, average maybe 5.5% a year, you’ll have about 30k after taxes are paid to live on. Hypothetically, of course.

CosmicSpiral

STNG, TEN, TNK, ASC, DLNG You'll need to track their price movement and find the best levels of resistance.

dcburgos17

As someone who ran paid social for hims/hers/apostrophe, they will be just fine with the change. They have been optimizing for upper funnel metrics to get away from “purchase only” campaigns for over a year now and the results have been fantastic (moving fully away from ASC).

8000000MadeinMarket

I was messing around and in Finviz I found that the only stock with RSI at Oversold-10 grade is ASC. They only in the market. And their results are not bad at all, they are debt free and offer a dividend around 8%. I think ASC exaggerated in this downtrend.

Upper_Maintenance_41

Watching ASC and STRL on Nov 6 STRL has been in an absolute tear. It's kind of expensive now, and dipped nearly 6% over the past week. Maybe people taking profits before an uncertain earnings? If they can show continued growth then this thing will keep crushing. YTD up 72%. Last earnings they reported a $2.5B backlog and massive earnings and revenue growth. I want to add a little to my position before earnings, as I'm bullish, but I feel that any slight disappointment will send the stock tumbling. They are a diversified construction company but growth is AI-driven, they are building data centers. So general bullish/bearish feelings on AI spending also a factor. All signs point to solid numbers and momentum continuing. ASC is so cheap. The dividend yield is now around a ridiculous 8% and PE is under 4. I'm in at $16.80 average and I thought that was cheap. It's under $14 now, people are really bearish because of low oil prices, and nervous about growth. Shipping companies are inherently limited by the number of ships. However if they announce great profits and maintain or increase their dividend, this stock is dirt cheap. Last earnings, revenue was up 32% and EBITDA up 67%. Hate that reporting on both is the day after the election, too many macro factors may come into play on both of these.

2Serfs1Chalice

I guess no one has ever heard of accrual accounting or ASC 606 in here?

Father_of_Lies666

No matter which one wins, I am long $GME shares/calls, long $CHWY calls, long on $UVIX (for levered long volatility) and long dated puts on $BAC because those idiots are about to blow up. Also really like $ASC for oil shipping and $AGI for gold mining.

Father_of_Lies666

I like oil shipping. I like $ASC. Avoid Israeli ones, they seem to be fishy.

lostfinancialsoul

Yea I can tell you don't read the financials. Secondly you can't classified "everything and anything" under the sun per US GAAP. There is perspective US GAAP (ASC 730). When an activity falls under figure PPE 8-2 various things will be allocated and classified on the P&L as R&D. For example, if an engineer works 20 hours on for the discovery of new knowledge, that 20 hours is reclassified from G&A to R&D. The remaining other 20 hours sits in G&A. "A core strength of our business lies in our industry leading IP position. In addition to our comprehensive patent portfolio, our biggest proprietary advantage is our process design kit (PDK), the ‘how-to’ guide for Navitas designers to create new GaN based devices and circuits. Our GaN power IC inventions and intellectual property translate across all of our target markets from mobile, consumer, EV, enterprise, and renewables. We evaluate various complementary technologies and look to improve our PDK, in order to keep introducing newer generations of GaN technology. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2024, we spent approximately 93% and 90%, respectively, of our revenue on research and development. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2023, we spent approximately 93% and 109%, respectively, of our revenue on research and development. Navitas’ research and development activities are located primarily in the US and China." "Costs related to research, design, and development of our products are expensed as incurred. Research and development expense consists primarily of pre-production costs related to the design and development of our products and technologies, including costs related to cash and share-based employee compensation, benefits and related costs of sustaining our engineering teams, project material costs, third party fees paid to consultants, prototype development expenses, and other costs incurred in the product design and development process."

johnnywonder85

Accounting terminology (ASC 320): **Available-for-Sale Securities** -- Investments not classified as either trading securities or as held-to-maturity securities. **Held-to-maturity** -- are other debt instruments (aka bonds) that has a fixed term. **Trading Securities** -- Securities that are bought and held principally for the purpose of selling them in the near term and therefore held for only a short period of time. Trading generally reflects active and frequent buying and selling, and trading securities are generally used with the objective of generating profits on short-term differences in priceTrading Securities. The difference is a management decision/choice that usually included an action (saleable or not with an active market) Also, The term "debt security" (Any security representing a creditor relationship with an entity), and excludes all of the following: **Option contracts, Financial futures contracts, Forward contracts, Lease contracts, Receivables** that do not meet the definition of *security* and, so, are not debt securities, for example: **Trade accounts receivable** (arising from sales on credit by industrial or commercial entities, **Loans receivable** (arising from consumer, commercial, and real estate lending activities of financial institutions). The unrealized gain/loss aspects here represent two separate Income statement items. Trading and HtM are normal business operations, whereas AfS is considered unique until actually sold (then captured as business operations).

Upper_Maintenance_41

 I dunno how it'll go, but if it goes down again I'm buying again. Also forgot to mention ASC, with the price drop the dividend yield is over 7% now. Not to mention it's still a good and growing company with at least a 2-3 year runway for margins with the Suez Canal closed for business.

funkinaround

[https://www.dolthub.com/repositories/post-no-preference/options](https://www.dolthub.com/repositories/post-no-preference/options) has some SPY options with greeks. There are so many expirations for SPY; this will only have 3. It also will not have all of the strikes. Here's an example query: SELECT * FROM `option_chain` where act_symbol = 'SPY' and date = '2024-08-23' LIMIT 1000; Here's the [link](https://www.dolthub.com/repositories/post-no-preference/options/query/master?active=Tables&q=SELECT+*%0AFROM+%60option_chain%60%0Awhere+act_symbol+%3D+%27SPY%27+and%0Adate+%3D+%272024-08-23%27%0AORDER+BY+%60date%60+ASC%2C+%60act_symbol%60+ASC%2C+%60expiration%60+ASC%2C+%60strike%60+ASC%2C+%60call_put%60+ASC%0ALIMIT+1000%3B%0A) to this query.

Vast_Cricket

A few weeks late but there is still opportunity. Federal agency has bonds that pays more than 3 month s Treasury. This one is surely getting called when interest rate falls below 5.9% as early as 02/26/2025 @ 100.00000. I loaded up with different gov't agency bonds from 5-20 years un-insured doubt they have ever defaulted. 2 weeks ago paying 5.8 to 6%. These if needed you can sell them on the open market. There are many reit closed end fairly safe that offers more than 6% or even more. They had to pay off 90% profit to be exampted to pay capital gain tax. Reasonably safe and can resell. In fact the ones I have appreciated 10% on top of 9% for several years. There are also container ship stocks that offer even low 2 figure%. But if Suez, Panama canals are constipated from war. Chinese company owns Panama canal. The stocks can tank. There are also index companies that suppliment its hefty interest selling covered calls from different market. SPY, QQQ etc. They are all liquid to say they are safer than Treasury notes then I will be not telling the truth. || || | |[Farm Credit System 5.9% 08/26/2044 Callable](javascript: var newWin = window.open('/Trade/Bonds/tradebondsuperpopup.aspx?&Buy=True&Sell=False&BothBuyandSell=False&BestQuoteOnly=True&FilterByFaceValue=False&fromCusipSearch=False&searchFaceValue=&MaturityFromMonth=2&MaturityToMonth=2&MaturityFromYear=2044&MaturityToYear=2045&MinYieldToMaturity=&MinYieldToWorst=&MinimumCoupon=&PriceFrom=&PriceTo=&CouponFrequency=&CFMJan=False&CFMFeb=False&CFMMar=False&CFMApr=False&CFMMay=False&CFMJun=False&CFMJul=False&CFMAug=False&CFMSep=False&CFMOct=False&CFMNov=False&CFMDec=False&MaturityFromDay=22&MaturityToDay=21&yieldCurve=&IncludeOnlyRecentlyIssued=False&IncludeOnlyZeroCoupon=False&IncludeOnlyNonCallable=False&IncludeOnlyCallable=False&IncludeOnlyVariableRate=False&IncludeOnlySteppedRateCoupon=False&CallProtection=&currentState=SearchResults&MaturityAccordion=False&primarySort=YTM&primarySortOrder=DESC&secondarySort=MATURITY&secondarySortOrder=ASC&IsFixedIncomeSearch=true&PricingQuantity=25&Cusip=3133ERRJ2&SSID=102482890&ProductGroupCode=AGENCY&Product=AGENCY&maturityValue=&ItemId=[PARAM_ITEMID]&MaturityFrom=&MaturityTo=&PandRspRatings=&Dealer=VBONDB0CDEE5MDI9IAKD4&SearchType=FixedIncomeSearch&isSrchClick=No&ShowOffer=true&TradeCD=N&IsNewIssue=false&NewIssuesDN=false%27,%27SuperBondWin%27,%27height=640,width=775,scrollbars=yes,status=no,toolbar=no,menubar=no,location=no,resizable=yes%27);newWin.focus();)3133ERRJ2|

Vast_Cricket

A few weeks late but there is still opportunity. Federal agency has bonds that pays more than 3 month s Treasury. This one is surely getting called when interest rate falls below 5.9% as early as 02/26/2025 @ 100.00000. I loaded up with different gov't agency bonds from 5-20 years un-insured doubt they have ever defaulted. 2 weeks ago paying 5.8 to 6%. These if needed you can sell them on the open market. There are many reit closed end fairly safe that offers more than 6% or even more. They had to pay off 90% profit to be exampted to pay capital gain tax. Reasonably safe and can resell. In fact the ones I have appreciated 10% on top of 9% for several years. There are also container ship stocks that offer even low 2 figure%. But if Suez, Panama canals are constipated from war. Chinese company owns Panama canal. The stocks can tank. There are also index companies that suppliment its hefty interest selling covered calls from different market. SPY, QQQ etc. They are all liquid to say they are safer than Treasury notes then I will be not telling the truth. || || | |[Farm Credit System 5.9% 08/26/2044 Callable](javascript: var newWin = window.open('/Trade/Bonds/tradebondsuperpopup.aspx?&Buy=True&Sell=False&BothBuyandSell=False&BestQuoteOnly=True&FilterByFaceValue=False&fromCusipSearch=False&searchFaceValue=&MaturityFromMonth=2&MaturityToMonth=2&MaturityFromYear=2044&MaturityToYear=2045&MinYieldToMaturity=&MinYieldToWorst=&MinimumCoupon=&PriceFrom=&PriceTo=&CouponFrequency=&CFMJan=False&CFMFeb=False&CFMMar=False&CFMApr=False&CFMMay=False&CFMJun=False&CFMJul=False&CFMAug=False&CFMSep=False&CFMOct=False&CFMNov=False&CFMDec=False&MaturityFromDay=22&MaturityToDay=21&yieldCurve=&IncludeOnlyRecentlyIssued=False&IncludeOnlyZeroCoupon=False&IncludeOnlyNonCallable=False&IncludeOnlyCallable=False&IncludeOnlyVariableRate=False&IncludeOnlySteppedRateCoupon=False&CallProtection=&currentState=SearchResults&MaturityAccordion=False&primarySort=YTM&primarySortOrder=DESC&secondarySort=MATURITY&secondarySortOrder=ASC&IsFixedIncomeSearch=true&PricingQuantity=25&Cusip=3133ERRJ2&SSID=102482890&ProductGroupCode=AGENCY&Product=AGENCY&maturityValue=&ItemId=[PARAM_ITEMID]&MaturityFrom=&MaturityTo=&PandRspRatings=&Dealer=VBONDB0CDEE5MDI9IAKD4&SearchType=FixedIncomeSearch&isSrchClick=No&ShowOffer=true&TradeCD=N&IsNewIssue=false&NewIssuesDN=false%27,%27SuperBondWin%27,%27height=640,width=775,scrollbars=yes,status=no,toolbar=no,menubar=no,location=no,resizable=yes%27);newWin.focus();)3133ERRJ2|

Vast_Cricket

A few weeks late but there is still opportunity. Federal agency has bonds that pays more than 3 month s Treasury. This one is surely getting called when interest rate falls below 5.9% as early as 02/26/2025 @ 100.00000. I loaded up with different gov't agency bonds from 5-20 years un-insured doubt they have ever defaulted. 2 weeks ago paying 5.8 to 6%. These if needed you can sell them on the open market. There are many reit closed end fairly safe that offers more than 6% or even more. They had to pay off 90% profit to be exampted to pay capital gain tax. Reasonably safe and can resell. In fact the ones I have appreciated 10% on top of 9% for several years. There are also container ship stocks that offer even low 2 figure%. But if Suez, Panama canals are constipated from war. Chinese company owns Panama canal. The stocks can tank. There are also index companies that suppliment its hefty interest selling covered calls from different market. SPY, QQQ etc. They are all liquid to say they are safer than Treasury notes then I will be not telling the truth, || || | |[Farm Credit System 5.9% 08/26/2044 Callable](javascript: var newWin = window.open('/Trade/Bonds/tradebondsuperpopup.aspx?&Buy=True&Sell=False&BothBuyandSell=False&BestQuoteOnly=True&FilterByFaceValue=False&fromCusipSearch=False&searchFaceValue=&MaturityFromMonth=2&MaturityToMonth=2&MaturityFromYear=2044&MaturityToYear=2045&MinYieldToMaturity=&MinYieldToWorst=&MinimumCoupon=&PriceFrom=&PriceTo=&CouponFrequency=&CFMJan=False&CFMFeb=False&CFMMar=False&CFMApr=False&CFMMay=False&CFMJun=False&CFMJul=False&CFMAug=False&CFMSep=False&CFMOct=False&CFMNov=False&CFMDec=False&MaturityFromDay=22&MaturityToDay=21&yieldCurve=&IncludeOnlyRecentlyIssued=False&IncludeOnlyZeroCoupon=False&IncludeOnlyNonCallable=False&IncludeOnlyCallable=False&IncludeOnlyVariableRate=False&IncludeOnlySteppedRateCoupon=False&CallProtection=&currentState=SearchResults&MaturityAccordion=False&primarySort=YTM&primarySortOrder=DESC&secondarySort=MATURITY&secondarySortOrder=ASC&IsFixedIncomeSearch=true&PricingQuantity=25&Cusip=3133ERRJ2&SSID=102482890&ProductGroupCode=AGENCY&Product=AGENCY&maturityValue=&ItemId=[PARAM_ITEMID]&MaturityFrom=&MaturityTo=&PandRspRatings=&Dealer=VBONDB0CDEE5MDI9IAKD4&SearchType=FixedIncomeSearch&isSrchClick=No&ShowOffer=true&TradeCD=N&IsNewIssue=false&NewIssuesDN=false%27,%27SuperBondWin%27,%27height=640,width=775,scrollbars=yes,status=no,toolbar=no,menubar=no,location=no,resizable=yes%27);newWin.focus();)3133ERRJ2|

Vast_Cricket

I log in 12 month CD on Schwab it pays 4.75. [JPMorgan Chase & Co. OH 4.75% CD 10/03/2025 Callable](javascript: var newWin = window.open('/Trade/Bonds/tradebondsuperpopup.aspx?&Buy=True&Sell=False&BothBuyandSell=False&BestQuoteOnly=True&FilterByFaceValue=False&fromCusipSearch=False&searchFaceValue=&MaturityMin=1&MaturityMax=16&MinYieldToMaturity=&MinYieldToWorst=&MaturityFromMonth=7&MaturityToMonth=12&MaturityFromYear=2025&MaturityToYear=2025&MaturityFromDay=25&MaturityToDay=8&NewIssue=False&SecondaryIssue=False&IncludeOnlyNonCallable=False&IncludeOnlyCallable=False&IncludeOnlyVariableRate=False&IncludeOnlySurvivorsOption=False&currentState=SearchResults&MaturityAccordion=False&primarySort=YTW&primarySortOrder=DESC&secondarySort=Maturity&secondarySortOrder=ASC&IsFixedIncomeSearch=true&PricingQuantity=25&Cusip=46657VHT0&SSID=102449665&Product=CD&ProductGroupCode=CD&maturityValue=&ItemId=[PARAM_ITEMID]&MaturityFrom=&MaturityTo=&PandRspRatings=&Dealer=SCHWAB&SearchType=FixedIncomeSearch&isSrchClick=No&ShowOffer=true&TradeCD=N&IsNewIssue=true&NewIssuesDN=false%27,%27SuperBondWin%27,%27height=640,width=775,scrollbars=yes,status=no,toolbar=no,menubar=no,location=no,resizable=yes%27);newWin.focus();) I have no trouble finding uninsured or high yield anytime etf that pays over 8%. With small risk.

boygito

Yeah this proves further you don’t know what you’re talking about. ASC 740 is GAAP, and has nothing to do with taxes paid to the government. What you’re referencing is how tax liabilities are calculated and presented on financial statements, which is completely different than taxes actually paid on tax returns. This is because GAAP and the tax code are completely different. If you want to prove that goodwill impairment is a real tax deduction, please cite actual tax code instead of GAAP ASC. The second thing you reference disproves your original point, which is Intel just decided when to Impair their goodwill. These impairment tests are done on a regular basis, not when they decide to. So the timing of impairment had nothing to do with when revenue was earned. Please take some accounting classes in your free time so you have an idea of what you’re talking about instead of trying to cite random accounting codes that aren’t actually relevant

Father_of_Lies666

I know what I did. I put everything into GME and defensive value stocks like ADM or ASC. This markets about to crumble.

_AnecdotalEvidence_

ASC crushed earnings. Will my calls print or will it crash because fuck me?

_AnecdotalEvidence_

Maybe my ASC 8/16 calls aren’t cooked

_AnecdotalEvidence_

$ASC 

_AnecdotalEvidence_

Whelp. My $ASC 25 8/16 calls are fucked

GrumpyButtrcup

It depends on the local laws regarding breakage and expiration dates. In the US, most of that is contained in ASC 606 and IFRS 15. [https://fasb.org/page/PageContent?pageId=/projects/recentlycompleted/revenue-from-contracts-with-customers-topic-606-and-leases-topic-842effective-dates-postissuance-summary.html](https://fasb.org/page/PageContent?pageId=/projects/recentlycompleted/revenue-from-contracts-with-customers-topic-606-and-leases-topic-842effective-dates-postissuance-summary.html) [https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ifrs-15-revenue-from-contracts-with-customers/](https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ifrs-15-revenue-from-contracts-with-customers/) The funds can be claimed as recognized revenue after the card expires with unclaimed credit. If the card does not expire, the company must hold that credit on the books indefinitely until redeemed. Some jurisdictions have escheatment laws where unclaimed funds must be turned over to the state. Individuals can redeem their credit from the state using services like the official government tool [unclaimed.org](http://unclaimed.org) or private tools like [missingmoney.com](http://missingmoney.com)

marcboy123

Container shipping stocks and bulk carrier stocks. Ex. ZIM, SBLK, ASC, GNK, GOGL, FRO. Baltic dry index recently is going up again. Container freight price is nearing covid highs.

_hiddenscout

I own a few, but they aren't all completely defense. $WWD, more of an aerospace with some defense aspects [https://www.woodward.com/en/industry/military](https://www.woodward.com/en/industry/military) $CW, more of naval company, but you also get some nuclear power components [https://www.curtisswright.com/markets/defense](https://www.curtisswright.com/markets/defense) $DRS, they are smaller defense name, but the most pure dense of the bunch.  They operate through Advanced Sensing and Computing (ASC) segment, and Integrated Mission Systems (IMS) segments.

marcboy123

I am thinking about buying some dry bulker carriers as well, Batic Dry Index is rebouding as well. Going to buy some ASC, GOGL or SBLK, whichever option contract is cheaper.

_hannibalbarca

ASC

Upper_Maintenance_41

I'm also in Ardmore Shipping ASC. As long as these shitty wars rage on then shipping wins.

Upper_Maintenance_41

I mentioned $ASC a couple of times, that has been steadily rising, sold some of the 6/21 $25 calls to come out with a solid profit on the whole shebang and letting the rest ride for free. Hope some people got in early and cashed some out yesterday when it jumped. I think it'll keep rising, but personally I love the free options and willing to sacrifice a bit of potential upside to know I'm out ahead no matter what. Still holding shares too. Next el cheapo play is Melco Resorts $MLCO $11 7/19 call. Just bought in at $0.15 today. I made money earlier this year on Melco calls and shares. I like 7/19 because it's right before earnings. Melco builds casino resorts resorts for mega rich people who are unaffected by mere economic factors. They finally got some open and they are earning.

Yuancy

Specifically, it was largely due to all Private TMTG convertible notes automatically converting to shares when the merger was complete. Given that the change in fair value of the derivative liability was a $226M expense, it’s fair to say all these convertible note holders got a great deal on their conversions. Plus $55M in stock-based-comp under G&A related to the merger and $30M in SBC given to vendors under R&D. “All Private TMTG Convertible Notes were automatically converted into shares of our common stock at closing of the Merger, and pursuant to ASC 815, the derivative liabilities were revalued immediately prior to the conversion of the Private TMTG Convertible Notes on March 25, 2024, when our closing share price was $49.95 per share. The substantial increase in the value of our common stock when combined with the certainty of our execution of the Merger were primarily responsible for the increase in the change in fair value of the derivative liabilities”

csky

Actually a very good question which made me double look. Basically the new shares are issued at market value of 1000$: you created value out of thin air. And immediately given away that value for 900$. No cash changed hands other than the 100$ debt. The purpose is basically not having to pay the notes. I can't comment on tax issues. I'm pasting the company explanation below: Change in the fair value of the derivative liabilities of the Private TMTG Convertible Notes increased by approximately $231,575.9, or 4,092%, for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The Private TMTG Convertible Notes conversion features were accounted for as liability classified derivatives under ASC 815, which were subject to remeasurement to fair value at each balance sheet date. Changes in the fair value of its derivative liabilities were recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. All Private TMTG Convertible Notes were automatically converted into shares of our common stock at closing of the Merger, and pursuant to ASC 815, the derivative liabilities were revalued immediately prior to the conversion of the Private TMTGConvertible Notes on March 25, 2024, when our closing share price was $49.95 per share. The substantial increase in the value of ourcommon stock when combined with the certainty of our execution of the Merger were primarily responsible for the increase in the change in fair value of the derivative liabilities. The increase in the fair value of the derivative liabilities is a non-cash expense and the issuance of Private TMTG common stock upon conversion of the Private TMTGConvertible Notes extinguished the derivative liabilities immediately prior to the Closing. Therefore, there were no derivative liability as of March 31, 2024 and there will no longer be future earnings adjustments pertaining to the Private TMTGConvertible Notes derivative liabilities.

Sean147rah

TRMD, DHT, ASC and other similar tanker transport stocks are profitable, gaining value historically / presently and several pay pretty damn good divvys.

throwawaymyalias

Fyi, QMCO had a meeting with Nasdaq last Tuesday (14 May) and requested the company stock remained listed pending a final determination on the company's ASC Topic 606 application. Additionally, QMCO plans to file a number of outstanding 10Q reports prior 27 June. Note: if the Nasdaq determines that QMCO can stay listed based on the upcoming 10Q filings in June, I expect QMCO will fly much higher as the stock currently trades around 55 cents. QMCO has nearly $400M in annual revenue; in recent years traded in the teens; and has previously traded sub-$1.00 before bouncing much higher. QMCO has also been in business for around 40 years, and has hundreds of employees. (Also, QMCO is a quantum computing-related stock, and I expect that sometime in the near future there will be a quantum computing sector pump as quantum computing ties directly into the future needs of AI. And we've already seen how the AI trade has been playing out...) I'm long 100k QMCO (have been for months), as well AUG $2.50 calls (which have seen a LOT of buying over the past couple of weeks....).

Upper_Maintenance_41

Bought a handful of Ardmore Shipping (ASC) $25 calls 6/21 bc they seem dirt cheap Supposedly well positioned on global shipping but I don't know anything about shipping or boats and barely anything about oceans in general. Been a fun stock to follow over the past few weeks tho.

_RAPTORMAN_

Think I might start looking at building position in shipping. STNG ASC ZIM.

_hiddenscout

Ended up opening a position in CRAI last week, but looking at my screener this morning, a new interesting company popped up. I'm getting really bullish on defense names especially those that deal with naval and aerospace. Anyone here follow $DRS? Here's a description of what they do: >It operates through Advanced Sensing and Computing (ASC) segment, and Integrated Mission Systems (IMS) segments. >The ASC segment designs, develops, and manufacture sensing and network computing technology that enables real-time situational awareness required for enhanced operational decision making and execution; and offers sensing capabilities span applications, such as missions requiring advanced detection, precision targeting and surveillance sensing, long range electro-optic/infrared, signals intelligence, and other intelligence systems including electronic warfare, ground vehicle sensing, active electronically scanned array tactical radars, dismounted soldier, and space sensing. >This segment also provides network computing, which are utilized across a range of mission applications including platform computing on ground and shipboard for advanced battle management, combat systems, radar, command and control, tactical networks, tactical computing, and communications. >The IMS segment designs, develops, manufacture, and integrates power conversion, control, and distribution systems, ship propulsion systems, motors and variable frequency drives, force protection systems, transportation, and logistics systems for the U.S. and allied defense customers. >This segment also offers electrical propulsion systems, which includes power conversion, control, distribution, and propulsion systems, as well as power dense permanent magnet motors, energy storage systems and associated efficient, rugged, and compact power conversion, electrical actuation systems, as well as cooling technologies; and motor controllers, instrumentation and control equipment, electrical actuation systems, and thermal management systems. Here's their latest earnings presentation: [https://investors.leonardodrs.com/static-files/193d4748-2f0b-459b-a639-b1cb21a6cf32](https://investors.leonardodrs.com/static-files/193d4748-2f0b-459b-a639-b1cb21a6cf32)

Artmasterx

"The Warrant Exchange Agreement will be accounted for in accordance with ASC 815-40-55- which results in the recording of an expense in the amount of $390,625. In evaluating the Warrant Exchange Agreement, Genesis SPAC determined that based upon its lack of potential Business Combination opportunities and the relationship between Genesis SPAC and Genesis Sponsor that the modification of the existing warrants would be entered into to compensate the Sponsor." We wanted to compensate ourselves, so we did!

gray-scales

Feeling is mutual. I’ve seen your other comments. You clearly don’t seem to understand what is going on 👍 The ASC 606 is a free resource for everyone! Enjoy reading it :)

Material_Tea_6173

They’ve likely been able to deliver the performance obligation that’s spelled out in the contract they execute with their customers. Whatever they publicly promised in the future of what FSD can do or whether it’s in beta or not is irrelevant in the context of ASC 606. What matters are the obligations laid out in the executed contract. I can understand the confusion from a consumer perspective, but the fact that FSD isn’t really FSD yet is irrelevant.

Material_Tea_6173

That’s not how it works. The full promise of what FSD should be can be 100 years away or come out tomorrow, but within the context of ASC 606 (the accounting codification over revenue), what matters is what Teslas obligations are as written in the contract executed between them and the customer (i.e what FSD offers in its current state). As Tesla meets its performance obligations as laid out in the contract, they’re able to recognize that revenue on their income statement.

gre9467

ASC

dideldidum

I posted a list of the longest range cars. at the price point of model y, there are other cars for that range. [https://www.adac.de/rund-ums-fahrzeug/autokatalog/marken-modelle/autosuche/?bodyTypes=Cabrio&bodyTypes=Coupe&bodyTypes=Hochdach-Kombi&bodyTypes=Kombi&bodyTypes=Roadster&bodyTypes=Schr%C3%A4gheck&bodyTypes=Stufenheck&bodyTypes=SUV&engineTypes=Elektro&pageNumber=1&basePrice.min=44000&basePrice.max=57000&electricRange.min=500&electricRange.max=600&sort=ALPHABETIC\_ASC](https://www.adac.de/rund-ums-fahrzeug/autokatalog/marken-modelle/autosuche/?bodyTypes=Cabrio&bodyTypes=Coupe&bodyTypes=Hochdach-Kombi&bodyTypes=Kombi&bodyTypes=Roadster&bodyTypes=Schr%C3%A4gheck&bodyTypes=Stufenheck&bodyTypes=SUV&engineTypes=Elektro&pageNumber=1&basePrice.min=44000&basePrice.max=57000&electricRange.min=500&electricRange.max=600&sort=ALPHABETIC_ASC) i mean. just look around man. it is not 2010 anymore. everyone has an ev fleet.

Artopotamus

I just bought Ardmore shipping(ASC). Good dividend and undervalued. A couple congressmen have loaded up on this stock.

MasterBoring

equipment manufactures part is very simplified, there are so many more equipment and material venders in between, a lot of them are base in Taiwan so regards here won't have access tho. For example, the Quartz Furnace tube manufacture TSC(5434.TW) stonk went up after earthquake cause tube are known to break easily, then you have ASE(3711.TW | NYSE: *ASX*) that provide advanced packaging services that support TSMC's CoWoS, or you have ASC(4770.TW) that provide chemical supplies, or Acter Technology(5536.TW) that help build massive clean rooms for TSMC, Kinik(1560.TW) here selling sci-fi sand papers that polish the wafers

Father_of_Lies666

There are some great mutual funds that are safe. Vanguard is typically my go to here. ASC is a behemoth that pays an awesome div, so maybe a minor position there. If he’s a vagabond, then property likely doesn’t make sense. He’s not going to make that last without the market. I’d go with a mix of stable mutuals and 1-2 high div yield tickets.

Sudden_Feedback_2194

My regarded predictions based on absolutely nothing: SBLK will break $30 by 3/22/25 GOGL will hit break new 52wk high by q3 ASC will trail both

Baba_yyaga

Actually they are. International accounting standard 38 or for USA ASC 320

The64only

That’s completely incorrect. Refer to [EY’s FRD](https://www.ey.com/en_us/assurance/accountinglink/financial-reporting-developments---share-based-payment--after-th) section 4.2.2 which clearly synthesizes compensation expense recognition for service-based awards. >Even if an award is for past services,, compensation cost should be recognized entirely over the explicit, substantive service vesting period that extends after the grant date. Further, refer to section 4.4.2.2 for awards with performance conditions. >Compensation cost must be recognized over the employee’s requisite service period or the nonemployee’s vesting period if it is probable that the performance condition will be satisfied. Finally, refer to ASC 718-10-25-21 which states that “compensation cost shall be recognized if the good is delivered or the service is rendered, and no compensation cost shall be recognized if the good is not delivered or service is not rendered.”

The64only

That’s not how share-based compensation works under ASC 718 at all. To start, you would need to understand the vesting criteria. If it’s strictly time dependent then the expense is recognized over the recipient’s service period. If it’s performance based, which it likely is, the expense is dependent on the probability of the vesting criteria being met. As for the FV, it’s not just the grant date price of the stock in this case. As a private company, Reddit would’ve had to run a computation for the FV. Likely they had to run a monte-carlo simulation or a different lattice model because the awards are likely market-based. In summary, no, share-based compensation doesn’t just get expensed at the grant date.

notaswedishchef

They have one competitor, airbus an EU based company. They make missile components and fighter jet parts for lockheed martin so at least 30% of their income is uncle sam and the rest well, who else is making planes in the US the size of a 747. Not defending them but just like the big banks its a company the government has no interest in closing just slapping on the wrist. Further “By the end of last month, Boeing's backlog (total unfilled orders before ASC 606 adjustment) was 6,189 aircraft (Boeing's backlog record of 6,216 aircraft was set in December 2023), of which 4,775, or 77 percent, were 737 NG/MAX narrowbody jets.” They have a massive backlog which is usually a bad call in production wholesale but again, only major airplane producer for the commercial market that isn’t small private jet. Airbus is their only competitor and they also have a big backlog so money is basically banked and the government loves the MIC they are scummy as fuck and are led by the worst types of leadership that knows they have a golden egg and just buy government influence and contracts.

Ros1031

Yeah! I use [tikr.com](https://tikr.com), and love it. Mine is set to: Country: USA ROA - Value - LTM >12 Forward TEV/EBIT - FS - +1 - Mean <15 I then sort through the individual stocks and check out their balance sheets, latest earning call transcripts, and some investigative work on their leadership. It pointed me towards $ASC, $MAMA, and $SURG & $PET, all of which have made nice earnings.

Noddite

Very shady revenue reporting, but that is how ASC 606 works. The PCAOB wanted better clarity, and now we have muddles games, and a headache for the consolidation and reporting teams every month/quarter.

_RAPTORMAN_

Holy muff… shipping tickers ZIM STNG TRMD ASC are all down 5% at the same time. Who is the captain now??

Difficult_Note_12

If you look at TNK and ASC--their charts--they didn't really take off until Biden got into office. If Trump gets back in, he will start drilling for oil domestically like a wild man.

esquesk

You think if they lent it out they’d be able to recognize revenue? You understand that’s against ASC 606 principles right? You have to google what ASC 606 is because you’ve never read a 10-K? Okay sit down.

gabagool69

Being that you're bashing the CPAs in here, I would like you to explain the relationship between accounts receivable and satisfaction of performance obligations in accordance with ASC 606.

funkinaround

Here's a [query](https://www.dolthub.com/repositories/post-no-preference/options/query/master?active=Tables&q=SELECT+*%0AFROM+%60option_chain%60%0Awhere%0Aact_symbol+%3D+%27TSLA%27+and%0Adate+in+%28%272023-10-16%27%2C+%272023-10-18%27%2C+%272023-10-20%27%29+and%0Aexpiration+%3D+%272023-12-15%27+and%0Astrike+%3D+190+and%0Acall_put+%3D+%27Put%27%0AORDER+BY+%60date%60+ASC%2C+%60act_symbol%60+ASC%2C+%60expiration%60+ASC%2C+%60strike%60+ASC%2C+%60call_put%60+ASC%0ALIMIT+1000%3B%0A) to show the prices of this option from Oct 16 - Oct 20. TSLA released earnings on Oct 18, so this was likely an earnings play where he got in, earnings were released, then he got out.

DustinLyle

You went through all that formatting, and you’re still not making a valid counter-point. You must like arguing? The filed ZG 10Q, has the proper EPS. (Excluding the discontinued operations) My argument that losses from “discontinued operations” for ZG should be included in-line with ASC 260, is based on my assertion that ZG is regularly “pivoting on purpose”, making it a function of their business… And doing so specifically, to not list those losses in the measure of diluted operations EPS on the 10Q. Them starting new, and winding down other business units is a regular standard of practice for them and not one area of their business is anymore “continuing operations” than any another. The initially distributed (and erroneous) .33 EPS, posted/distributed by everyone including Nasdaq and Bloomberg, came straight from the 8K that was filed simultaneously. No one at Bloomberg is typing out the EPS for their earnings newswire after manually/physically reading the 10Q and deciphering the math and industry jargon - and releasing said news wire within 10 seconds of the 10Q being filed. It’s automated. There’s a database. An API/JSON call by data subscribers/publishers. In that processes, someone is putting the earnings data into the Nasdaq reported financials DB, the data of which becomes callable by API keyholders at a specific pre-determined time. Or, it’s just coincidence that every news network on the planet, simultaneously reported the same erroneous earnings number from the wrong document, and then they all (mostly) now display the correct number, a day later.

grimkhor

I'm not to point out all the nonsense you said. Here's some. >Does anyone here know the reporting/input process for the 10Q data that’s distributed to all the broker/analyst tools that we use? This is what you're talking about. >First, they include an EPS measure based on EBITDA, which is non-GAAP compliant - (they disclose this), but their including it in their earnings report (likely intentionally) causes unnecessary misinterpretations of their financial situation. Proof being? It was erroneously reported as the net EPS being circulated yesterday. > >They actually booked a net loss of (.12) EPS and now today, all the data sources have their EPS (.12) > >but, even (.12) is not accurate or in-line with what ASC 260 requires to be reflected when reporting earnings. This is just false. Sure a point for you knowing what you do. "Basic Earnings Per Share (EPS) excludes dilution and is reported separately for continuing operations and discontinued operations." [https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/702513/000119312513433900/R13.htm](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/702513/000119312513433900/R13.htm) >Where in the process of filing the 10Q does the EPS get read or entered as “official” for API distribution to all the platforms? > >Yesterday, $ZG “beat” analyst estimates… in the minutes that passed from the earnings release, every published data source I have, was reporting their EPS as .33 diluted, and .36 basic. RH had .33 eps, TDA had .33, Bloomberg Terminal had .33 on the ticker research tab AND the news wire. Here you clearly talk about 10Q and non-GAAP EPS which are not reported in the 10Q. Sure a point for you knowing what you do. >First, they include an EPS measure based on EBITDA, which is non-GAAP compliant - (they disclose this), but their including it in their earnings report (likely intentionally) causes unnecessary misinterpretations of their financial situation. Proof being? It was erroneously reported as the net EPS being circulated yesterday. The statement is again just false. 10Q is the quarterly financial report and 8K is just a report on major events. You do not clarify which one you mean but by referencing the correct reports it must mean 10Q which again didn't include the number you complain about. Sure a point for you knowing what you do. >Real GAAP reportable EPS is (.14) net loss. This is as provided in the information you can read above is number you have to calculate yourself non-GAAP EPS and "real" GAAP EPS. As you can take also from my statement that those are not included in their 10Q which you clearly know and is a sure point for you knowing what you do. "Basic Earnings Per Share (EPS) excludes dilution and is reported separately for continuing operations and discontinued operations." [https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/702513/000119312513433900/R13.htm](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/702513/000119312513433900/R13.htm) > It seems, every quarterly report they file includes a PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED, supplementary EBITDA EPS, that becomes the number initially published to platforms, then the distributed EPS data is changed by the following morning to the GAAP reportable, ASC 260 required EPS. And then, it STILL omits an often HUGE portion of actual loss, every time. See above. Nonsense. Sure a point for you knowing what you do. >Their historical pricing action on earnings day AH, and the day after, will substantiate the “change” accusation in reported eps data. (Bait and switch?) They cannot and did not change their 10Q. Sure a point for you knowing what you do. >As mentioned about inaccurately reporting losses. A significant accusation… I believe they *“pivot on purpose”*, all by itself, as an accounting strategy. If true, it means their underlying business, isn’t a business… It’s a slush fund. The media? Because clearly their 10Q is fine. Sure a point for you knowing what you do. Then you ramble high on some industrial glue.

Ros1031

Buying up as much ASC as my savings account can afford

thenuttyhazlenut

Why ASC?

Ros1031

Hello everyone, I'm 20, I started investing yesterday with $1000! I'm looking for some medium-long term growth. While I understand the importance of diversification, I'm spending the first few months going a little heavy on individual stocks. Would appreciate any feedback, especially on the individual stocks I've picked. 51% in $ASC 25% in $CAVA 20.5% in an ETF (SPYV) 1.5% in $KNSA I'm also thinking of investing another $250 and picking up $PSHG, just because similar to $ASC they have a strong RoA, trailing TEV/EBIT and growth. Thanks!

Ros1031

Hello everyone, I'm 20, I started investing yesterday with $1000! I'm looking for some medium-long term growth. While I understand the importance of diversification, I'm spending the first few months going a little heavy on individual stocks. Would appreciate any feedback, especially on the individual stocks I've picked. &#x200B; 51% in $ASC 25% in $CAVA 20.5% in an ETF (SPYV) 1.5% in $KNSA &#x200B; I'm also thinking of investing another $250 and picking up $PSHG, just because similar to $ASC they have a strong RoA, trailing TEV/EBIT and growth. Thanks!