Clearly you are affiliated with big. This has been done to...

Clearly you are affiliated with big. This has been done to death. In your example the customer has accepted the tv and agreed to pay for it. In BIgs case customers Had not even accepted to pay for the video and had no obligation to do so to either big or the financing company.

Afr writing articles about Harvey Norman is not going to change the fact that they have sold tv’s and they received cash from GE. If every single customer defaulted on their payments for tvs that they have purchased (which is not going to happen) then perhaps there is some risk depending on the financing agreement or perhaps the risk is with GE.

Compare to Big - financing company (not disclosed) advanced funds to BIG to make a video. Customer would pay back if they agreed to accept and pay for video. Big offered to Make free videos for customers and customers never accepted them and certainly were not going to pay. So all the cash that had been advanced had to be paid back with additional 24% penalty.

Meanwhile BIG reported as revenue from customers all the advances that the financing co made (and would have to be paid back with an additional 24% penalty). There was no mention that the receipts were advances from a financing company to produce a video that will then be offered to a customer to see if they would like to pay for it (no they wouldn’t) (so receipts from borrowings is what this is). The advances were reported as customer receipts-ie customer has paid for video that they have accepted. This financing arrangement was not disclosed until afr reported and even then it took a couple of asic further clarification questions while holding them in suspension for it to be known that the customers hadnt accepted the videos. It was all reported as if the cash was directly received from customers.

Big difference