And we took that and applied that all the way back. And through testing from, there should be adjustments to that time period. And the second was – second, just so you can see them both, the second was there – at the time of the first audit, there was no forward visibility of returns. And with the hindsight of our return percent, the process yielded a need for a return reserve. So that return reserve was added back on the balance sheet and again tried to make it all consistent with what we are doing today.
Unidentified Analyst: From an investor point of view, it seems like the previous management didn’t follow the general accepted accounting principles. And if that’s the case, they have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. Is current management going to hold them to that? Is there a potential to file litigation against the people who basically decimated the value of this company?
John Bunka: I think – we hear your question, and I don’t know that we have a response for that today. There has not been, to date, any steps that this management team has made toward that objective, but we hear your question.
Unidentified Analyst: Understood you’re hearing it, but no offense, you guys have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders that currently own the stock today. And since you’ve taken the position in office, if previous management had essentially not followed the generally accepted accounting principles starting in 2021 when this acquisition occurred, somebody is responsible to shareholders to hold them accountable. And it falls in your lap. Are you ready to hire a law firm to hold them accountable, the previous management, for the money they received from the secondary offering? The company – basically $200 million disappeared. And shareholders deserve fiduciary responsibility from its management. Is there – you haven’t decided to look into legal representation to hold them accountable, previous management that is?
John Bunka: Bob – we said a number of things that are hard not to take exception to. How do you – I guess how do we – we didn’t say that they weren’t following generally accepted accounting practices, Bob. And I’m not trying to split hairs with you, but I guess, could you clarify that, Bob?
Robert Barry: The one that Rick mentioned of returns adjustment, that’s the case where hindsight was 20/20. We had a whole year to look back and to see the returns. What was available to them at the time and some of the other issues, some of these are judgment calls. And I can’t answer the questions whether we should go sue. We have D&O insurance. They’re covered under the D&O insurance. So to what end, I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know the answer to that question. Management – honestly, and I don’t want to sound pollyannish, but we’re not looking back. We’re looking forward and trying to – we were handed something. We’re working on it. We’re trying to make it better and to go forward from here.
We think that’s where the value will come from the stockholders. If we can – if we – given the time to right the ship here and to continue to grow business in the midst of a recession. But I’m – personally, I’m not looking back for retribution or anything. So I think – that’s my view. That’s not the board’s view. That’s not Rick’s view. That’s my view. I want to look forward. I don’t want to look back. It is what it is. I can’t change it. We’ve got it right. We are following GAAP. But hindsight’s 20/20 and some of these reserve adjustments, I mean, the returns reserve was a big number, $7 million to $8 million.
John Bunka: And there is an active shareholder action that is and will be processed and addressed by this team as we go forward. But your question was quite specific as to will management be holding them accountable for – in the manner you described? And that’s why you’re seeing us be fairly cautious in how we respond to that. And I hope you can appreciate that.
