990 Inventory Totals, From $88K to $1.4 million in 5 years Options

[Pickle]

I wonder why none of Danny's books were admitted in to evidence?

...

Were they not admitted into evidence because of the strong desire for prying eyes to stay out of "Danny's" other business?

Surely the cost to 3ABN for those books would be information that would have been good for the auditors to see since the cost does pertain to 3ABN; wouldn't it?

The last sentence makes me laugh. This is the conclusion of the matter! Danny won't give us information we need, therefore, how could it pertain to the subject at hand.

If that is the case, why do they even mention it?

Interesting, Fran.

• Danny testified that he had written three books, as if that might help his case.
• The books were not entered into evidence, as if they would hurt his case.
• Danny has chosen to withhold evidence from a court of law.

Now why has he withheld evidence from a court of law?

• Is Judge Rowe a convicted embezzler?
• Does Judge Rowe publish information about Danny on a website?
• Did Judge Rowe refuse to go along with set-in-concrete rules laid down by Harold Lance?
• Has Judge Rowe used a username at Wikipedia that includes the initials "Dr"?
• Is Danny trying desperately to hide something?

As far as Judge Rowe's statement that the books had nothing to do with the property, I think she meant that they don't help determine that the property should indeed be tax exempt

[Green Cochoa]

I'm certainly not an expert in this field, but that does nothing to prevent me having some questions about the data on those 990s. Would someone be so kind as to contribute to my understanding on a few points?

1) Why are the salaries bouncing around so much? What are the variables?

Example: Moses Primo is listed as receiving: $50,359; $63,630; $69,732.14; $50,818; and UNLISTED for years 2001 through 2005 respectively. You see him increasing until 2004, and then he gets a serious cut in pay of $19,000. Then, apparently he gets a promotion to a directorship which removes the necessity of listing his salary on the form in 2005. Interesting how he gets "demoted" before he gets "promoted," or am I misunderstanding something here?

Example: Linda Shelton gets: $117,110 in 2004 as a non-officer, non-director, yet bearing the title of "vice president." In 2005 she gets $82,922 as a "former" officer/director. Is it just me, or do those figures seem to be inflated above what the separation agreement allowed for? And, how do those numbers relate to her divorce? Is there a relationship to that, on the part of the non-profit entity?

2) Why is it that Danny Shelton signed the form June 30, 2003 (for 2002 return), and October 28, 2002 (for 2001 return), but all the rest have the dates blacked out? Are these forms due April 15?

3) Total contributions and gifts for each year, 2001-2005, are listed as: $12,323,162; $14,057,326; $10,902,656; $13,581,898; and $14,060,275. Basically, I don't see any particular trend here, other than that the contributions seem to be following the economy. I remember how the economy took a nosedive after 2001, which likely hit the pocket books of most people the hardest about a year or two later, and has been on the mend since. I'm I missing any grand reason to announce the great increase in donations since Linda left in 2004? Perhaps I need to see the 2006 form.

Well, I was just a little interested in whether I could make heads or tails of the numbers myself, having taken but few business courses. There are certainly some things that anyone could understand, if they put a little "investigation" into it. Most of it, however, seems meaningless to me.

[Aletheia]

To anyone;
http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinform...s/pt/pt04-1.pdf
the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax Lawsuit pp 32. middle of paragraph 1.

I will eventually ask about the whole paragraph, but right now:

I wonder why none of Danny's books were admitted in to evidence?

Was the Publisher Danny Lee Shelton?

Isn't that what it said? Your problem and the problem of many here is you can not separate things. You are always trying to add apples and oranges together and making a federal cases about how they now logically equal citrus fruit..

Confusion-- truth mixed with error is Babylon. So many here without facts just babble on..

Has anybody considered that Danny Shelton does not own 3ABN, and they don't own him?

Can people publish books under their own label and not have them belong to their employer?

If that's the case do they belong on the ministry taxes or on personal taxes??? As all this was before the Shelton divorce then it doesn't play into marriage settlements as Linda already probably spent any money made, or got her half in the divorce.

It sems to me all things should be considered and before rushing to judgment the one accused should be given the benefit of the doubt, and if all is not known? RESERVE JUDGMENT.

Bob's already got Danny guilty or withholding evidence and is running with it as if it's fact, asking why he did so? and hasn't even proven that it was required or how Danny's books related to the local property tax case. This is typical of the majority of accusations on the save 3abn not site, and here, and it's a downright shame and terrible way for God's"professed" people to opperate. The rest of the world is gonna look at this garbage and hiss and scorn us and not want anything to do with such unloving judgmental scandalmongers.

Evil surmising and wishing to find evidence to accuse and condemn will lead to finding somethng to accuse and condemn with

I am afraid that many here will never find or see the truth, They have already found what they seek, and cannot see, hear, or consider anything beyond their own profound reasonings and almighty opinions.

That way is dangerous... and I would caution all including myself. For our Lord warned us about this type of thing and thinking...

My two cents.

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Apr 8 2007, 08:43 AM

[Pickle]

Okay, I've just taken everything in the 3ABN store and put it into a spreadsheet. I've added up all the suggested donations and come up with a total of $1,117.75.

What seems really weird is that the shopping cart on their site operates as if the suggested donations are really concrete prices. When I add items to the cart it does not allow me to adjust the suggested donation either up or down. Why not? Does it do that later during the Check Out process?

I then took the $1,117.75 figure and multiplied it by 60%, since that would be a normal retailer discount. That gives us $670.65 as the theoretical cost of having one item of each thing offered in stock.

Now if we divide that number into $1.4 million, we get 2,088. That means if they had 2,088 of every item listed on their website, we can account for the $1.4 million.

Of course, if one buys 2,088 of a book, you'd get a lot heftier of a discount than 40% off. I assure you of that. If I order a case of 30 or so from one supplier, I get it at 50%. At a quantity of 2,088 I'm sure most publishers would be happy to give you 40% (60% off) or more.

Does 3ABN have a warehouse that is housing this much inventory? Or am I missing something somewhere?

[LaurenceD]

Isn't that what it said? Your problem and the problem of many here is you can not separate things. You are always trying to add apples and oranges together and making a federal cases about how they now logically equal citrus fruit..

Confusion-- truth mixed with error is Babylon. So many here without facts just babble on..

Has anybody considered that Danny Shelton does not own 3ABN, and they don't own him?

Can people publish books under their own label and not have them belong to their employer?

If that's the case do they belong on the ministry taxes or on personal taxes??? As all this was before the Shelton divorce then it doesn't play into marriage settlements as Linda already probably spent any money made, or got her half in the divorce.

It sems to me all things should be considered and before rushing to judgment the one accused should be given the benefit of the doubt, and if all is not known? RESERVE JUDGMENT.

Bob's already got Danny guilty or withholding evidence and is running with it as if it's fact, asking why he did so? and hasn't even proven that it was required or how Danny's books related to the local property tax case. This is typical of the majority of accusations on the save 3abn not site, and here, and it's a downright shame and terrible way for God's"professed" people to opperate. The rest of the world is gonna look at this garbage and hiss and scorn us and not want anything to do with such unloving judgmental scandalmongers.

Evil surmising and wishing to find evidence to accuse and condemn will lead to finding somethng to accuse and condemn with

I am afraid that many here will never find or see the truth, They have already found what they seek, and cannot see, hear, or consider anything beyond their own profound reasonings and almighty opinions.

That way is dangerous... and I would caution all including myself. For our Lord warned us about this type of thing and thinking...

My two cents.

Much of what you're saying here is wrong. I'd be glad to show you why, but first I need to know something. Do you understand the reasoning for all of Judge Rowe's conclusions? Do you agree with Rowe's recommendation? If not what parts of the entire document do you disagree with?

The reason this is important is because Judge Rowe was limited to the information the applicant provided, and she says so in several places. She talks plenty about the combined uses (commercial and and not for profit uses) and how it is not appropriate under the corporation's filing.

Do you understand what 3abn was doing wrong?

[Rosyroi]

Alethia said:

Bob's already got Danny guilty or withholding evidence and is running with it as if it's fact, asking why he did so? and hasn't even proven that it was required or how Danny's books related to the local property tax case. This is typical of the majority of accusations on the save 3abn not site, and here, and it's a downright shame and terrible way for God's"professed" people to opperate. The rest of the world is gonna look at this garbage and hiss and scorn us and not want anything to do with such unloving judgmental scandalmongers.

We all see what we want to see. My glasses don't view the same way your glasses view the BSDA threads and save3abn.org. So sorry.

I believe that posting the numbers gives those who do understand the numbers the chance to give their expert opinion so the rest of us can be enlightened.

JMO

Rosyroi
@}---;---;-----

[Snoopy]

It sems to me all things should be considered and before rushing to judgment the one accused should be given the benefit of the doubt, and if all is not known? RESERVE JUDGMENT.

Oh yeah. You mean like the way Linda's or Derrell's or Johann's termination from 3ABN was handled???

This post has been edited by Snoopy: Apr 8 2007, 12:18 PM

[Aletheia]

Okay, I've just taken everything in the 3ABN store and put it into a spreadsheet. I've added up all the suggested donations and come up with a total of $1,117.75.

What seems really weird is that the shopping cart on their site operates as if the suggested donations are really concrete prices. When I add items to the cart it does not allow me to adjust the suggested donation either up or down. Why not? Does it do that later during the Check Out process?

I then took the $1,117.75 figure and multiplied it by 60%, since that would be a normal retailer discount. That gives us $670.65 as the theoretical cost of having one item of each thing offered in stock.

Now if we divide that number into $1.4 million, we get 2,088. That means if they had 2,088 of every item listed on their website, we can account for the $1.4 million.

Of course, if one buys 2,088 of a book, you'd get a lot heftier of a discount than 40% off. I assure you of that. If I order a case of 30 or so from one supplier, I get it at 50%. At a quantity of 2,088 I'm sure most publishers would be happy to give you 40% (60% off) or more.

Does 3ABN have a warehouse that is housing this much inventory? Or am I missing something somewhere?

YES you are missing a great deal. I have worked for companies and had to do inventory many times, esp the end of the year inventory before taxes are filed. Inventory also includes anything you can put your hands on which belongs to the entity and is kept on hand., or stocked, Even to pens and paper for the employess, or for printing..

You are acting as if the property tax case was only in reference to and concerned with inventory in the 3ABN store.

Obviously it wan't.

Please don't quit your day job, whatever that may be, when all this smoke clears.

Oh yeah. You mean like the way Linda's termination from 3ABN was handled???

Certainly.

They were well acquainted with the situation and all involved, and had the necessary facts in order to make an intelligent decision, you don't.

Nor obviously do you have facts to prove they didn't, since you never bring em to the table, yet you just keep making snide comments and maligning those at 3ABN anyway.

Shame on you!

All you seem to have is some here say from some sour grapes..

Not the best way to render righteous judgment...



This post has been edited by Aletheia: Apr 8 2007, 11:49 AM

[Snoopy]

They had the facts, you don't.

Nor obviously do you have facts to prove they didn't, since you never bring em to the table, yet you just keep making snide comments and maligning those at 3ABN anyway.

Shame on you!

Hit a nerve, huh??


Blessings, A!!! Happy Easter!!!





This post has been edited by Snoopy: Apr 8 2007, 07:25 PM

[Noahswife]

Oh yeah. You mean like the way Linda's termination from 3ABN was handled???

Snoopy

Not the best way to render righteous judgment...

Is that what you are doing? Is that your cause and/or the reason for posting here?

This post has been edited by Noahswife: Apr 8 2007, 12:33 PM

[Snoopy]

duplicate post...

This post has been edited by Snoopy: Apr 8 2007, 12:02 PM

[lurker]

This website tells what "red flags" to look for in 990's and what they mean: http://www.businessjournalism.org/pages/bi...lore_in_form_9/

[djconklin]

... it's a downright shame and terrible way for God's"professed" people to opperate. The rest of the world is gonna look at this garbage and hiss and scorn us and not want anything to do with such unloving judgmental scandalmongers.

I agree wholeheartedly! We don't have to look any further as to why people aren't beating the doors down to become members and why we lose members almost as soon as they are brought int.

[mozart]

Al, first you insult to try to make people appear ignorant, then you list a bunch of questions that you ask as if you know the answer already. if you don't know the answers, may i suggest, since you seem to be aware of so much of the intricate details going on at 3abn, that you find the answers to your questions and then post them here. that would seem more productive to me.
from all of fran's post i have read, she seems like a sweet lady and isn't diserving of attacks or insults. you don't have to be so hateful to every single person that says something you disagree with. if you are speaking in the defense, then offer some information that is useful. please, instead of "babbling on", go get the answers to your questions and bring them here for all of us to benefit from. ty

Isn't that what it said? Your problem and the problem of many here is you can not separate things. You are always trying to add apples and oranges together and making a federal cases about how they now logically equal citrus fruit..

Confusion-- truth mixed with error is Babylon. So many here without facts just babble on..

Has anybody considered that Danny Shelton does not own 3ABN, and they don't own him?

Can people publish books under their own label and not have them belong to their employer?

If that's the case do they belong on the ministry taxes or on personal taxes??? As all this was before the Shelton divorce then it doesn't play into marriage settlements as Linda already probably spent any money made, or got her half in the divorce.

It sems to me all things should be considered and before rushing to judgment the one accused should be given the benefit of the doubt, and if all is not known? RESERVE JUDGMENT.

Bob's already got Danny guilty or withholding evidence and is running with it as if it's fact, asking why he did so? and hasn't even proven that it was required or how Danny's books related to the local property tax case. This is typical of the majority of accusations on the save 3abn not site, and here, and it's a downright shame and terrible way for God's"professed" people to opperate. The rest of the world is gonna look at this garbage and hiss and scorn us and not want anything to do with such unloving judgmental scandalmongers.

Evil surmising and wishing to find evidence to accuse and condemn will lead to finding somethng to accuse and condemn with

I am afraid that many here will never find or see the truth, They have already found what they seek, and cannot see, hear, or consider anything beyond their own profound reasonings and almighty opinions.

That way is dangerous... and I would caution all including myself. For our Lord warned us about this type of thing and thinking...

My two cents.

[LaurenceD]

djc, because you're a newbie here (welcome), allow me to say...

This is what happens when you accuse someone of something, don't follow scriptural process, and leave the world to guess what really happened. It's the thing that conspiracy theories are made of. Why leave someone to guess? Full disclosure to the stockholders is in order, not - "shall we get on with things, this is water under the bridge." This is what someone who has something to hide can only wish for...that the public supporters will forget and forgive. NOT!

Oh, the scripture...

1Tim 5:19 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. 20 Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning.

I realize some claim Mat 18 is to be followed...

Mat !8:15 If your brother sins against you,[b] go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'[c] 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 18 I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be[d]bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[e] loosed in heaven. 19 Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.

Trouble is, those who claim to follow this scripture won't clearly define how they determined there was sin, because they can't reaveal the evidence. Tricky, eh? Unless one can demonstrate what one is claiming, by calling it such, one is saying nothing at all. Just a common rule of philosphy and logic.

Just to be clear: scripturally, where are the witnesses? What is the accusation, and how can someone call that sin? And, said parties should stop saying they have evidence if they can't demonstrate what they are saying. No one here, or on TV, is necessarily going to believe one side or the other, except what gets sorted out in the court of public opinion. And tons of people make their minds up by how this court proceeds. It does more than create a healthy kind of scepticism towards the whole story -- and I say story, because what's a revelation to a witness, is merely a story to anyone else, at least in this case -- it demonstrates a lot and helps people decide...in spite of lack of evidence.

Public discussion can be healthy for both sides. It ain't going away...like some would wish. So, best to face what's left -- head on. I've found it very helpful.