- Joined
- Feb 6, 2021
@Retink Retunk see you'd think that though but due to IAS 2 (International Accounting Standard 2). Basically, the international financial reporting standard states that you must mark each SKU of inventory at its lowest. It is HIGHLY unethical and unprofessional to do so else basically major holders can question it and have it investigated.
Now I personally in a professional sense believe they fudged it not complying with IAS 2 thus making it look more appealing to investors. Most investors now though see past it and vote with their wallets and leave, hence the massive offloading of stock and devaluation. They used to pool in D&D with MTG when it was doing badly to make it look like it was doing better.
As for the 30th Price gouge, some people were monitoring the site and there were no issues but there always are with secret lairs. Personally, I think they fudged it to save face as they could not risk it not selling because it would probably affect their value again. They are probably thinking it will attract share buys but I sincerely doubt it when Bank of America tells the public your assets are better off being unloaded than it's a really hard sell.
Now I personally in a professional sense believe they fudged it not complying with IAS 2 thus making it look more appealing to investors. Most investors now though see past it and vote with their wallets and leave, hence the massive offloading of stock and devaluation. They used to pool in D&D with MTG when it was doing badly to make it look like it was doing better.
As for the 30th Price gouge, some people were monitoring the site and there were no issues but there always are with secret lairs. Personally, I think they fudged it to save face as they could not risk it not selling because it would probably affect their value again. They are probably thinking it will attract share buys but I sincerely doubt it when Bank of America tells the public your assets are better off being unloaded than it's a really hard sell.