Monday, December 31, 2018

"Robert 2.0" chatbot : World's first "robot ufologist"?? (A Christmas present for the UFO community : 2 of 3)

During 2018, I have been exploring the potential application of various forms of Artificial Intelligence software to UFO research. I have focused mainly on potential data analysis, partly because I now have a rather large collection of digitised UFO books, magazines/newsletters, dissertations, official documents and case reports (possibly - so far as I can tell - the largest such collection in the world).

As a minor, fun off-shoot of that work on AI software, I have created a chatbot to attempt to respond to raw reports of basic UFO sightings by asking some questions and suggesting _possible_ solutions for them. This may, hopefully, lead to automated ways of trying to filter UFO reports.

"Robert 2.0" is, of course, just a fairly basic first attempt. At least I think it is a first. I'm not aware of anyone previously attempting to create a chatbot of this type. I understand that the convention is to hype up such chatbots as being "robots" (which, as a fan of Isaac Asimov, I find a bit offensive...) and to add "world's first" in front of any such innovation... :)

You can interact with "Robert 2.0" at the link below:
https://tinyurl.com/ycv7p8th







I have also integrated "Robert 2.0" with Facebook, so you can also interact with this chatbot by going to the webpage below and clicking on the "Send Message" button at the top right of the page and just sending "hi" or "hello" to start the interaction:
https://www.facebook.com/Robert-20-Robbie-the-Robot-ufologist-522581678238086/

The "Robert 2.0" chatbot utilises logic set out in flowcharts published in the updated version of the book "UFO Study". That book was originally written by veteran ufologist Jenny Randles. It was subsequently updated by another British researcher, Robert Moore. They have made the updated version of that book available online as a searchable PDF. It can be found at the link below.
http://files.afu.se/Downloads/Books/Other/Randles,%20Jenny%20and%20Moore,%20Robert%20-%20UFO%20Study.pdf



The logic for the daytime sightings part of the chatbot is based on the flowchart below from "UFO Study", as updated by Robert Moore.


The logic for the nocturnal sightings part of the chatbot is based on the flowchart below from "UFO Study", as updated by Robert Moore.


The "Robert 2.0" chatbot uses the IBM Watson Assistant framework, with integration with Facebook. The logic reflected in the above flowcharts can be easily amended, expanded and refined. Nothing is written in stone. Everything can be edited with a few clicks and a bit of thought.







The point of this little exercise is not to develop a perfect chatbot. "Robert 2.0", bless his heart, certainly isn't that bright. The point, however, is to prompt a bit of thinking about _how_ UFO reports can be filtered and how this can be achieved most efficiently and effectively - whether using chatbots, AI software or otherwise.

Basically, I just hope this provides a bit of fun at the end of 2018 ... and prompts a bit of thought during 2019. :)

Monday, November 26, 2018

Expert input statement : A Christmas present for the UFO community (1 of 3)

As the first of three presents for the UFO community this Christmas, I would like to share the expert input statement below and the list of endorsements of it.  The following individuals kindly agreed to my requests to endorse this statement : Dr Kit Green (formerly of the CIA), Dr Hal Puthoff (of TTSA), Dr Eric Davis, Dr Bruce Maccabee (formerly of the US Navy), Dr Danny Ammon (of Germany's GEP), Rev Dr Ray Boeche, Dr Irena Scott, Dr Chris Cogswell, Jim Semivan (formerly of the CIA), Jenny Randles, Colonel Charles Halt (formerly of the US Air Force), Lieutenant Colonel Kevin D Randle (formerly of the US Army), Nick Pope (formerly of the UK Ministry of Defence), Dr David Clarke, Dr Chris French, Dr Gilles Fernandez, James Oberg (formerly of NASA), Robert Sheaffer, Tim Printy, Lance Moody, Curt Collins, Wendy M. Grossman (founder of "The Skeptic"), Jan Aldrich, Barry Greenwood, Edoardo Russo (of Italy's CISU), Frank Warren, Chris Rutkowski, Christopher O'Brien, Richard Doty (formerly of the US Air Force OSI), Dr Mark Rodeghier (of CUFOS), John Schuessler (of MUFON), Tony Eccles (of BUFORA), Mark Allin (co-owner of the AboveTopSecret website), Rick Hilberg, Paul Dean, Keith Basterfield, Jacques Scornaux (of France's SCEAU-Archives OVNI), Mikhail Gershtein (of Russia) and Robbie Williams (English pop star).

[BEGIN QUOTE OF EXPERT INPUT STATEMENT] 
"We consider that obtaining input from disinterested experts on specific points regarding reports of 'UFOs' is likely to contribute to the study of relevant physical, historical, psychological and sociological issues. If you are able to help provide such input, we would appreciate you doing so".
[END QUOTE OF  EXPERT INPUT STATEMENT]  

Last year, a wide spectrum of the UFO community (including many prominent skeptics as well as UFO researchers) kindly endorsed a similar statement about the scanning of UFO periodicals and other material. I drafted that scanning statement to help get more permissions/cooperation for the scanning project I've been helping coordinate. 

Quoting that scanning statement (and the list of endorsements of it) when sending permission requests to relevant editors/groups helped raise my success rate with scanning permission requests for defunct periodicals from about 60% to above 90%. It also helped obtain scans from about 100 different groups / researchers in the last year, most of which have been made freely available online. As a result, it has been possible (with quite a bit of work by a lot of people) to get most of the main UFO periodicals from France (e.g. LDLN), Germany (e.g. CENAP Report) and Spain/Catalonia (e.g. Stendek) shared online as searchable PDFs in recent months - in addition to lots more from the UK, USA and Australia. 
http://files.afu.se/Downloads/Magazines/ 

Preparing that scanning statement probably has had the best cost / benefit ratio I've achieved within ufology. :) 

So, I've been thinking about proposing one or more other such statements to address some other problems. 

One of the main problems I have with some of the bickering within ufology is that certain issues could be settled (or at least argued on a more informed basis) if more input were obtained from disinterested experts from outside the ufo/skeptic community, e.g. on specific scientific issues. 

Some experts have been reluctant to get involved, so a relevant expert input statement _may_ improve the success rate of those seeking such input on specific issues.

Hence the expert input statement quoted above and my private soliciting of endorsements of that statement.  

(I do not think any further endorsements are needed. The list of endorsements is now rather lengthy...).

My success rate when raising queries with experts outside ufology has been running at about 60% during the last few years.  If this new expert input statement has the same sort of impact on success rates as my previous scanning statement, I'll be a happy bunny.

If you use this statement and the list of endorsements of it to try to improve your odds of getting a useful response from an expert outside the UFO community (which I hope at least some of you do...), I'd be grateful if you could take into consideration when writing relevant requests the fact that the use of the statement may reflect on me, the individuals that endorsed the expert input statement and the rest of the UFO community. In short, please:

(1) Be unfailingly polite in any relevant requests;

(2) Do a bit of homework first before writing the request, to focus your requests and avoid wasting the time of the relevant expert. The point is to seek information or views beyond the material which can easily be found online;

(3) If possible, share the results of your enquiry with the rest of the UFO community so that the quality of current debates may be improved. 

Onwards and upwards,

Isaac




Saturday, November 24, 2018

Rendlesham articles - a case study in potential collaboration?

During the next week or two, I'll try a few small experiments in relation to areas of potential collaboration in relation to the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident(s) of 1980 as part of a case study on potential greater collaboration within ufology more generally. Before addressing things like the AFOSI's non-investigation investigation, the CIA stuff or the footage, I firmly believe that it is necessary to lay a more solid foundation for future discussions - otherwise people are likely to continue to argue the same points for years. A few basic tools may help significantly. Firstly, I think an archive of searchable PDFs of relevant articles would be a fundamental tool to examining relevant inconsistencies and issues (and, potentially, seeking to resolve at least some of them).


Back in 2014, I spent quite a bit of time looking into Rendlesham and made pretty good progress on various fronts. I stopped that work due to various actions/people (which, while interesting to me at least, aren't directly relevant here). In short, some of those involved seemed to want to thwart any productive research into that incident. With some hesitation, however, I have recently started work on Rendlesham again.

As part of that work in 2014, I collated about 100-200 articles on Rendlesham from various newspapers and UFO magazines/newsletters. I shared that material with some researchers and I think I posted a list of the items online. As a result, another 4 or 5 items were added to my collection by various researchers. Since 2014, I've increased the size of my offline archive of material by, um, a lot so I thought I'd try again as a first step on a more detailed examination of certain inconsistencies and issues in relation to Rendlesham testimony and material.

During the last couple of weeks, I've once again spent a few days searching for, and collating, Rendlesham articles again.

Below is a resulting list of over 430 items regarding Rendlesham from various newspapers and UFO magazines/newsletters.

Due to copyright issues, I'm rather hesitant about posting searchable scans of all of these articles online. However, finding the date and sources of articles is more than half of the battle and it should be possible for anyone to locate most of these items using the details in the list below. If anyone does need a particular item for their private research then just let me know and I will generally be prepared to share material privately for private use provided that the relevant item isn't then posted online without the recipient first dealing with permission/copyright issues. My email address is isaackoi@gmail.com.

My reasons for bothering to collate and share this list include a desire to test an idea or two. For example, Jan Aldrich (of the excellent Project 1947 website) and I have been discussing whether it is necessary/desirable to list/scan each article in a UFO case file separately. I think this is desirable since this permits lists of items to be shared easily and collections merged. Jan is (quite fairly) doubtful whether it is worth the time required.  I fully accept that listing each item is time consuming, but think that this is the _only_ realistic way in which comprehensive resources would be compiled through collaboration between members of the UFO community. By starting such a list, others within the UFO community _could_ work to develop it.

Yes, I think there _is_ a UFO community, or at least a UFO community _could_ be developed. (At the moment, there are lots of UFO _sub-communities_ ...). One way to develop a wider and deeper UFO community would be by seeking ways in which we [i.e. those of us afflicted with an interest in ufology, whether skeptics, ufologists or those in between] can work together more productively. So, I will be interested to see if others work from, and develop, the list below.  If not, well, Jan wins the debate on this particular issue. I don't like to lose debates. Heck, I don't like to lose full stop.

So, this list is one step in a small case study on greater potential collaboration within ufology. 

The list below is in chronological order. So, the numbers of each item in the list will change if I insert anything as a result of further work or as a result of any input from others. It would be safer to refer to the _date_ of the item and its title.

Items are listed in the format [Year] [Month] [Day] - [Title] - [Notes, if any e.g. subject/author]


  1. 1980 12 27 - Daily Express 1
  2. 1980 12 27 - Daily Express 2
  3. 1980 12 27 - Daily Star
  4. 1980 12 27 - Daily Telegraph
  5. 1980 12 27 - Evening Argus
  6. 1980 12 27 - Glasgow Herald
  7. 1980 12 27 - Guardian
  8. 1980 12 27 - Irish News
  9. 1980 12 27 - Oxford Mail
  10. 1980 12 27 - Peterborough Evening Telegraph
  11. 1980 12 27 - Sun
  12. 1980 12 27 - The Sun
  13. 1980 12 28 - Plymouth Sunday Independent
  14. 1980 12 29 - Bournemouth Evening Echo
  15. 1980 12 31 - Peterborough Advertiser
  16. 1981 - Journal of the British Astronomical Association - Cosmos 749
  17. 1981 02 - British Astronomical Association Meteor Section newsletter no. 4 - 3amfireball
  18. 1981 03 - FSR - Jenny Randles
  19. 1981 05 20 - The New Standard
  20. 1981 07 - Your Eyes Magazine (unpublished)
  21. 1981 Summer - Lantern - No 33-34 - Dot Street
  22. 1982 01 - Northern UFO Network Case Summaries - No 1
  23. 1982 03 - FSR - Jenny Randles
  24. 1982 05 - BUFORA Bulletin - Dot Street
  25. 1982 06 - FSR - Jenny Randles - 5 pages
  26. 1982 10 - Earthlink No 12 - Dot Street
  27. 1982 or 1983 - The Unexplained - Jenny Randles - Need cover to check date of Vol 9 No 106
  28. 1983 03 - Northern UFO News - No 101 - Jenny Randles
  29. 1983 03 - Omni - Eric Mishara
  30. 1983 04 - Probe Report - Ian Myzyglod & Martin Shipp - Vol 3 no 4
  31. 1983 05 05 - Ipswich Evening Star
  32. 1983 05 06 - Woodbridge Reporter
  33. 1983 07 - Probe Report - Vol 4 No 1
  34. 1983 09 - Northern UFO News - No 104
  35. 1983 10 02 - News of the World (2)
  36. 1983 10 02 - News of the World (3)
  37. 1983 10 02 - News of the World (4)
  38. 1983 10 02 - News of the World (5)
  39. 1983 10 02 - News of the World (6)
  40. 1983 10 02 - News of the World (Pt 1)
  41. 1983 10 02 - News of the World (Pt 2)
  42. 1983 10 02 - News of the World
  43. 1983 10 02 - Sunday Express
  44. 1983 10 02 - Sunday Mirror
  45. 1983 10 02 - Sunday People
  46. 1983 10 03 - Daily express (2)
  47. 1983 10 03 - Daily Express
  48. 1983 10 03 - Daily Star
  49. 1983 10 03 - Daily Times 1
  50. 1983 10 03 - Daily Times 2
  51. 1983 10 03 - Guardian
  52. 1983 10 03 - Ipswich Evening Star
  53. 1983 10 03 - Scottish Daily Express 2
  54. 1983 10 03 - Scottish Daily Express
  55. 1983 10 03 - The Times - Vincent Thurkettle
  56. 1983 10 05 - Daily Times
  57. 1983 10 05 - Ipswich Evening Star
  58. 1983 10 06 - Evening Star
  59. 1983 10 07 - Woodbridge Reporter
  60. 1983 10 09 - News of the World - 2
  61. 1983 10 09 - News of the World (2)
  62. 1983 10 09 - News of the World (3)
  63. 1983 10 09 - News of the World
  64. 1983 10 09 - Sunday People 2
  65. 1983 10 09 - Sunday People
  66. 1983 10 10 - Evening Star
  67. 1983 10 10 - Stars and Stripes
  68. 1983 10 11 - Daily Telegraph 2
  69. 1983 10 11 - Daily Telegraph
  70. 1983 10 11 - Stars and Stripes
  71. 1983 10 12 - Daily Times
  72. 1983 10 12 - Ipswich Evening Star
  73. 1983 10 12 - Manchester Evening News
  74. 1983 10 12 - The News
  75. 1983 10 23 - News of the World (2)pdf
  76. 1983 10 23 - News of the World
  77. 1983 10 25 - Daily Times
  78. 1983 10 26 - Ipswich Evening Star
  79. 1983 10 27 - Telegraph
  80. 1983 11 03 - Daily Times
  81. 1983 11 03 - Evening Star
  82. 1983 11 06 - News of the World (2)
  83. 1983 11 06 - News of the World (3)
  84. 1983 11 06 - News of the World
  85. 1983 11 21 - The Beverly Times
  86. 1983 12 - FSR - Editorial on recent press coverage
  87. 1983 12 - The SBI Report
  88. 1984 - MUFON Symposium - Greenwood
  89. 1984 - The SBI Report - No 44
  90. 1984 01 - U C - W Raymond Drake
  91. 1984 02 - BUFORA Bulletin - BUFORA meeting notes
  92. 1984 03 - FSR - Cartoon
  93. 1984 05 - Earthlink No 15
  94. 1984 05 03 - Anglia Advertiser
  95. 1984 08 - FSR - Jenny Randles
  96. 1984 09 - UFO Research Australia newsletter - vol 5 no 5
  97. 1984 10 25 - Daily Times
  98. 1984 10 25 - Ipswich Evening Star
  99. 1984 10 26 - Daily Times
  100. 1984 10 31 - Daily Times
  101. 1984 11 - IUR - Jenny Randles
  102. 1984 11 - Northern UFO News - No 110
  103. 1984 12 07 - Daily Times
  104. 1984 12 20 - Chronicle & Echo
  105. 1985 - Pursuit - _incomplete_
  106. 1985 01 - Magonia - No 18 - Rogers Sandell on Sky Crash - No 18
  107. 1985 01 - MUFON - John Grant - Walt Andrus
  108. 1985 01 05 - The Guardian (2)
  109. 1985 01 05 - The Guardian
  110. 1985 03 - Just Cause - n 03
  111. 1985 03 - MUFON - Ian Ridpath and Walt Andrus
  112. 1985 03 09 - Huntsville Times
  113. 1985 04 - MUFON - Jenny Randles
  114. 1985 05 - FSR - Anonymised letter
  115. 1985 05 - IUR - Hynek
  116. 1985 05 - Magonia - No 19 - Willy Smith
  117. 1985 06 - MUFON - Jennie Zeidman
  118. 1985 07 - BUFORA Bulletin - Jenny Randles
  119. 1985 07 13 - The Guardian
  120. 1985 08 - Magonia - No 20 - Ian Ridpath
  121. 1985 09 - MUFON - Letters from Randles and Ridpath
  122. 1985 09 - U C - Ronald Thomson
  123. 1985 11 - IUR - Robert Coddington tape analysis
  124. 1985 11 - MUFON Journal - Jenny Randles
  125. 1985 12 - Magonia - No 21 - Steuart Campbell
  126. 1985 12 - MUFON - Ray Boeche - Willy Smith
  127. 1986 01 - BUFORA Bulletin - letters from Randles and Ridpath
  128. 1986 01 - FSR - Editorial
  129. 1986 01 - Northern UFO News - No 117
  130. 1986 04 - MUFON - Ridpath
  131. 1986 05 07 - Today
  132. 1986 05 24 - Ipswich Evening Star
  133. 1986 07 - Fortean Research Journal - Ray Boeche)
  134. 1986 07 08 - Weekend
  135. 1986 08 - MUFON - Mildred Biesele
  136. 1986 08 11 - The Beverly Times
  137. 1986 10 - Fortean Research Journal - Ray Boeche
  138. 1986 11 - MUFON - Jenny Randles
  139. 1986 Fall - The Skeptical Inquirer - Vol 11 No 01 - Ian Ridpath
  140. 1986 MUFON Symposium - Ray Boeche
  141. 1986 Spring - Skeptical Inquirer - Robert Sheaffer
  142. 1986 Spring - Skeptical Inquirer - Vol 10 No 03 - Sheaffer
  143. 1987 - BUFORA conference - Harry Harris and Mike Sacks
  144. 1987 07 - Northern UFO News - No 126
  145. 1987 09 - IUR - Randles halt tape fabricated
  146. 1987 09 - Magonia 27 - John Rimmer review of UFO Conspiracy
  147. 1987 09 - Northern UFO News - No 127
  148. 1987 10 - UFO Brigantia - No 27 - Robert Moore
  149. 1987 11 - New Scientist - Ariadne
  150. 1987 Summer - Skeptical Inquirer - Steuart Campbell
  151. 1987 Winter - Skeptical Inquirer - Steuart Campbell
  152. 1988 01 - UFO Brigantia - issue 29 - Eric Morris
  153. 1988 03 08 - Daily Times
  154. 1988 03 08 - East Anglian Daily Times
  155. 1988 03 25 - unknown - Dot Street
  156. 1988 04 26 - Southern Evening Echo
  157. 1988 05 04 - Southampton Advertiser
  158. 1988 05 05 - Southampton Advertiser
  159. 1988 09 - IUR - Benton Jamison
  160. 1989 01 - IUR - Jenny Randles
  161. 1989 07 21 - Yorkshire Post
  162. 1989 Fall - Fortean Research Journal - Ray Boeche
  163. 1990 11 - BUFORA - Jenny Randles
  164. 1991 - UFO Magazine tbc - Jim Speiser
  165. 1991 - UFO Magazine tbc - Terry Ecker
  166. 1991 01 - New York City Trubune - Antonio Huneeus
  167. 1991 01 03 - Tribune - Huneeus
  168. 1991 01 04 - Tribune - Huneeus
  169. 1991 05 - UFO Brigantia - issue 48
  170. 1991 08 25 - The Glens Falls Post Star
  171. 1991 11 - MUFON - Dennis Stacy
  172. 1992 03 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 11 no 1
  173. 1992 05 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 11 no 2
  174. 1992 07 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 11 no 3
  175. 1992 Spring - UFO Brigantia - issue 51
  176. 1993 03 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 12 no 1
  177. 1993 04 - The Ufologist - Anne Ecker
  178. 1993 04 - The Ufologist - vol 2 no 2
  179. 1993 07 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 12 no 3
  180. 1993 09 - Fate - Randles Boeche Huneeus
  181. 1994 03 - OVNI
  182. 1994 03 - UFO Magazine (UK) - Carole James
  183. 1994 03 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 13 no 1
  184. 1994 04 - Omni - A J S Rayl
  185. 1994 04 - OVNI
  186. 1994 05 06 - Sudbury Mercury
  187. 1994 12 04 - Sunday People
  188. 1994 12 05 - Daily Times
  189. 1994 12 05 - East Anglian Daily Times
  190. 1995 - BUFORA conference - Peter Robbins
  191. 1995 - Pegasus
  192. 1995 - Spring FSR - Omar Fowler
  193. 1995 01 - BUFORA - Jonathan Dillon interview of Halt
  194. 1995 01 - UFO Magazine (UK) - Halt lecture
  195. 1995 03 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 13 no 6 - Redfern
  196. 1995 03 - UFO Magazine (UK) - vol 13 no 6 - Scurrah - radar
  197. 1995 05 - UFO Magazine (UK) - Scurrah - radar
  198. 1995 06 27 - Guardian
  199. 1995 08 - The Times  - Andy Martin
  200. 1995 08 13 - Observer
  201. 1995 09 - NUFON - Jenny Randles
  202. 1995 09 - Truth Seekers Review - Roy Wilkinson
  203. 1995 09 02 - The Weekly News
  204. 1995 09 13 - Eastern Daily Press
  205. 1995 10 00 - Astronomy Now (Pt 11)
  206. 1995 10 11 - East Anglian Daily Times
  207. 1995 autumn - FSR - Larry Warren photo
  208. 1995 winter - nufon - Jenny Randles
  209. 1996 02 17 - New Scientist
  210. 1996 07 18 - The Sun (2)
  211. 1996 09 14 - Ipswich Evening Star
  212. 1996 10 15 - East Anglian Daily Times
  213. 1996 11 01 - East Anglian Daily Times
  214. 1996 12 14 - Eastern Daily Press
  215. 1997 - Beyond Magazine - Jon Downes
  216. 1997 - BUFORA conference - Larry Warren Peter Robbins Brenda Butler Dot Street
  217. 1997 - Flatland Magazine - Jim Martin interview of Peter Robbins
  218. 1997 - Summer IUR - Jennie Zeidman
  219. 1997 - UFO Magazine tbc - Michael Miley
  220. 1997 01 - Magonia 58 - John Harney on Open Skies Closed Minds
  221. 1997 02 - BUFORA - Jenny Randles
  222. 1997 03 - Saucer Smear
  223. 1997 05 12 - Ipswich Evening Star
  224. 1997 06 - OVNI
  225. 1997 06 06 - East Anglian Daily Times
  226. 1997 06 12 - Cannock Express and Star
  227. 1997 06 22 - The People
  228. 1997 07 - Roswell Daily Record - Peter Robbins
  229. 1997 07 - Strange Daze - No 14
  230. 1997 07 02 - East Anglian Daily Times
  231. 1997 08 21 - East Anglian Daily Times
  232. 1997 08 25 - East Anglian Daily Times
  233. 1997 08 27 - Nottingham Evening Star
  234. 1997 10 - Northern UFO News - No 177
  235. 1997 10 28 - National Examiner
  236. 1997 11 - Magonia - No 61 - Jenny Randles
  237. 1997 11 - MAGONIA review - randles on Left at East Gate
  238. 1997 or later - publication unstated - Sean Casteel Interview
  239. 1997 or later - Sightings Magazine - Jon Downes
  240. 1998 00 00 - Suffolk Coast & Heaths
  241. 1998 01 14 - East Anglian Daily Times
  242. 1998 01 22 - Cambridge Town Crier
  243. 1998 01 30 - East Anglian Daily Times
  244. 1998 02 - Magonia - No 62 - Christopher Allan
  245. 1998 04 - The Voice - No 35 - Barry King
  246. 1998 06 - Northern UFO News - No 179
  247. 1998 06 - Project Red Book aka YUFOS Magazine - vol 1 no 12
  248. 1998 06 16 - Ipswich Evening Star
  249. 1998 07 00 = Popular Mechanics
  250. 1998 10 - Northern UFO News - No 180 - Jenny Randles on Ralph Noyes
  251. 1998 spring - FSR - Hansard extracts
  252. 1998 Summer - Awareness - Vol 22 No 4 - Trip to Rendlesham
  253. 1998 Summer - IUR - Jenny Randles
  254. 1998 Winter - NUFON - Jenny Randles
  255. 1999 01 - NUFON - Jenny Randles
  256. 1999 01 12 - Daily Times
  257. 1999 01 20 - Evening Star
  258. 1999 03 - Magonia Supplement 13 - Nigel Watson on UFO crash landing
  259. 1999 04 - BUFORA - Robert Moore
  260. 1999 04 - Magonia Supplement 14 - Nigel Watson and Jenny Randles
  261. 1999 New Year - Northern UFO News - No 181 - Jenny Randles on James Easton
  262. 1999 Summer - Northern UFO News - No 182
  263. 2000 03 - UFO Magazine (UK) - James Easton
  264. 2000 07 - UFO Magazine - Larry Warren
  265. 2000 09 30 - Daily Times
  266. 2000 10 29 - News of the World
  267. 2000 11 - The UFO Enigma - Vol 21 No 3 - Bruni
  268. 2000 11 - UFO Magazine (UK) - Larry Warren
  269. 2000 11 13 - Daily Times
  270. 2000 11 24 - Herald
  271. 2000 11 24 - Publishing News
  272. 2000 12 20 - Variety
  273. 2000 12 28 - Daily Express
  274. 2000 12 28_Daily Express_AFU scan_CFI archive_keyword UFO.pdf - Shortcut.lnk"
  275. 2000 Fall - IUR - Richard Hall and Jenny Randles
  276. 2000 Winter - Northern UFO News - No 185
  277. 2001 01 - UFO Magazine (UK) - Bruni
  278. 2001 02 - Magonia Supplement - No 33 - Christopher Allan
  279. 2001 02 - MUFON - Jenny Randles
  280. 2001 03 - Magonia Supplement - No 35
  281. 2001 03 - Magonia Supplement 34 - Kevin McClure
  282. 2001 03 - Magonia Supplement 35 - Editorial on Bob Easton
  283. 2001 03 - UFO Magazine - Larry Warren
  284. 2001 04 - BUFORA - Malcolm Robinson
  285. 2001 04 - MUFON - Dwight Connelly and Jenny Randles
  286. 2001 04 - Project Red Book - vol 4 no 10
  287. 2001 05 - Project Red Book - vol 4 no 11
  288. 2001 05 - SUFOG Newsletter - No 127-128
  289. 2001 05 06 - Sunday Herald Sun
  290. 2001 06 - BUFORA - Brian James
  291. 2001 06 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  292. 2001 07 - SUFOG Newsletter - No 129-130
  293. 2001 08 28 - Guardian
  294. 2001 08 28 - The Guardian
  295. 2001 08 30 - Eastern Daily Press
  296. 2001 08 30 - The Star
  297. 2001 09 - UFO Magazine - Bruni
  298. 2001 09 05 - Anglian Daily Times
  299. 2001 09 08 - Evening Star
  300. 2001 10 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  301. 2001 11 - Project Red Book - vol 5 no 5
  302. 2001 11 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  303. 2001 Fall - IUR - Jenny Randles on Rendlesham File
  304. 2001 Fall - Skeptics UFO Newsletter - No 69 - Klass
  305. 2001 Summer - NUFON - Jenny Randles
  306. 2002 - MUFON Symposium - Peter Robbins
  307. 2002 01 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  308. 2002 02 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  309. 2002 03 - Project Red Book - vol 5 no 9
  310. 2002 04 - UFO Magazine
  311. 2002 05 - Project Red Book - vol 5 no 11
  312. 2002 08 - MUFON - summary of Peter Robbins presentation
  313. 2002 09 - UFO Magazine
  314. 2002 10 - UFO Magazine
  315. 2002 11 28 - Anglian Daily Times
  316. 2002 11 28 - Anglian Daily Times
  317. 2002 11 28 - Daily Press
  318. 2002 11 28 - Evening Star
  319. 2002 11 29 - Daily Mail
  320. 2002 11 29 - Daily Mirror
  321. 2002 11 29 - Daily Press
  322. 2002 11 29 - Mail
  323. 2002 11 29 - Metro
  324. 2002 11 29 - Scotsman
  325. 2002 11 29 - The Times
  326. 2002 12 03 - Independent
  327. 2002 12 03 - Unknown
  328. 2002 12 03 - Western Mail
  329. 2002 12 04 - Bangkok Post
  330. 2002 12 04 - National Post, Toronto
  331. 2002 12 04 - The Independent
  332. 2002 12 05 - Daily Mail
  333. 2002 12 06 - Daily Mail
  334. 2002 12 08 - Times, New York
  335. 2003 01 - SUFOG Newsletter - No 147-148
  336. 2003 04 - MUFON - Jenny Randles
  337. 2003 04 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  338. 2003 05 - OVNI
  339. 2003 05 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  340. 2003 06 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  341. 2003 06 30 - BBC News website
  342. 2003 07 - SUFOG Newsletter - No 153-154
  343. 2003 07 - UFO Magazine
  344. 2003 07 02 - Daily Mail - Conde
  345. 2003 08 - Saucer Smear
  346. 2003 08 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  347. 2003 09 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  348. 2003 09 08 - East Anglian Daily Times - Kevin Conde
  349. 2004 01 - SUFOG Newsletter - No 159-160
  350. 2004 02 20 - East Anglian Daily Times - Eric Morris letter
  351. 2004 03 - UFO Magazine (UK)
  352. 2004 04 07 - Evening News, Norwich - Movie
  353. 2004 04 21 - East Anglian Daily Times 2
  354. 2004 04 21 - East Anglian Daily Times
  355. 2004 11 13 - Evening Star
  356. 2004 or 2005 12 - UFO Magazine - Peter Robbins
  357. 2004 Summer - The Skeptic - Dave Clarke
  358. 2005 - Forestry Commission leaflet - UFO Trail
  359. 2005 01 - BUFORA
  360. 2005 01 23 - The Mail on Sunday
  361. 2005 01 24 - The Sun
  362. 2005 01 25 - Daily Mail
  363. 2005 01 30 - Sunday Express
  364. 2005 02 - BUFORA - Roy Rowlands
  365. 2005 04 - BUFORA - Doreen Jenkinson
  366. 2005 11 - North Fork Magazine - Peter Robbins
  367. 2005 11 19 - Daily Express
  368. 2005 11 19 - Daily Mail
  369. 2005 12 20 - East Anglian Daily Times
  370. 2005 12 26 - Sun
  371. 2005 12 27 - East Anglian Daily Times
  372. 2006 01 - OVNI
  373. 2006 01 - UFODATA - Andrew Pike and others
  374. 2006 03 - UFODATA - Peter Robbins
  375. 2006 04 - UFO Magazine (USA) - Peter Robbins - An American in Suffolk
  376. 2006 09 - UFODATA - Steve Johnson on Andrew Pikes book
  377. 2007 03 - Saucer Smear - Moseley
  378. 2007 05 05 - East Anglian Daily Times
  379. 2007 07 - UFODATA - Peter McCue
  380. 2007 11 - UFODATA - Andrew Pike
  381. 2007 12 - UFO Magazine (USA) - No 141
  382. 2008 01 - UFODATA - Jim Penniston
  383. 2008 03 - UFODATA - Georgina Bruni obituary by Nick Pope
  384. 2008 04 - MUFON - Billy Cox
  385. 2008 05 15 - Eastern Daily Press
  386. 2008 05 25 - Sunday Express
  387. 2009 03 30 - Telegraph - bear hoax
  388. 2009 03 31 - Daily Mail - bear hoax
  389. 2009 03 31 - Sun - bear hoax
  390. 2009 06 00 - BBC Wildlife
  391. 2009 08 18 - Daily Telegraph
  392. 2009 09 - Journal of Anomalous Sciences - Nick Pope
  393. 2009 09 - OVNI
  394. 2009 09 04 - EADT24 website
  395. 2009 09 05 - Daily Express - fertiliser fire
  396. 2009 09 05 - Daily Telegraph (2) - fertiliser fire
  397. 2009 09 05 - Sun
  398. 2009 12 - Magonia blog - review of ufos that never were
  399. 2010 08 05 - Daily Times
  400. 2010 09 - Sunlite - Tim Printy and Ian Ridpath
  401. 2010 11 - Sunlite - Tim Printy
  402. 2010 11 03 - Sun
  403. 2010 12 18 - Daily Times
  404. 2010 12 29 - The Sun
  405. 2010 approx - UFO Matrix - Vol 01 No 03 - Nick Pope
  406. 2011 01 - Sunlite - Peter Brookesmith and Tim Printy
  407. 2011 03 - Sunlite - Tim Printy
  408. 2011 03 03 - BBC News website
  409. 2011 05 - Sunlite - Tim Printy
  410. 2011 08 07 - The Sunday Telegraph
  411. 2011 09 - Sunlite - Tim Printy
  412. 2012 07 - Phenomena - Issue 039
  413. 2013 01 - Phenomena - Issue 045
  414. 2013 02 - MUFON Journal - Robert Hastings on radar
  415. 2013 05 - UFO Truth - No 01
  416. 2014 08 - Phenomena - Issue 064
  417. 2014 09 - MUFON Journal - Nick Redfern on Rendleshams other mysteries
  418. 2014 12 - Phenomena - Issue 068
  419. 2015 07 - Phenomena - Issue 075
  420. 2015 09 - Phenomena - Issue 077
  421. 2015 11 - Phenomena - Issue 079
  422. 2015 11 - Skeptical Inquirer - Vol 39 No 06 - Sheaffer
  423. 2016 09 - UFO Truth - No 21
  424. 2016 12 - Outer Limits Magazine - No 05 - Steve Longero
  425. 2017 01 - MUFON Journal - Philip Mantle on Steve Longero
  426. 2017 02 - MUFON Journal - Charles Halt on Steve Longero
  427. 2017 02 - Outer Limits Magazine - No 06 - Steve Longero
  428. 2017 03 - UFO Truth - No 24
  429. 2017 04 - Outer Limits Magazine - No 07 - Ronnie Dugdale
  430. 2017 05 - MUFON Journal - Nick Redfern
  431. 2017 06 - Outer Limits Magazine - No 08 - Ronnie Dugdale
  432. 2017 10 - Outer Limits Magazine - No 10 - Ronnie Dugdale
  433. 2017 12 - Outer Limits Magazine - No 11 - Ronnie Dugdale
  434. 2018 02 - Outer Limits Magazine - No 12 - Andrew Pike
  435. Undated - Flying Saucer Times - article from Globe

This list includes:

The first UFO magazine article on Rendlesham?? The March 1981 issue of the FSR (Flying Saucer Review) included a brief article about Rendlesham by Jenny Randles. Many people have probably heard of that article, since it (unlike some of the others I've posted) is mentioned fairly frequently, but here is a copy - just for ease of reference. I haven't found any earlier references to the Rendlesham sighting(s) in UFO magazines.


The first newspaper story on Rendlesham Forest sightings?? More than 2 years before the News Of The World "broke" the Rendlesham story with its front cover coverage on 2 October 1983, the Standard newspaper in the UK published the article below in May 1981 which included a photo of Jenny Randles in Rendlesham Forest and ended with a brief summary of relevant claims. (There were quite a few earlier newspaper articles about UFO sightings between Christmas and New Year in 1980, but I think this may be the first UFO newspaper article which mentioned sightings involving Rendlesham Forest or the Woodbridge/Bentwaters air bases).


An early article by Dot Street on Rendlesham ("Lantern", Summer 1981) : While the early mentions of Rendlesham in FSR [the Flying Saucer Review] by Jenny Randles are fairly well known, I think a few such early articles are relatively overlooked. One of those was by Dot Street in the "Lantern" issue for the summer of 1981. Ivan Bunn has kindly given me permission to upload scans of Lantern, so that full issue can be found at the link below but, for ease of reference. http://files.afu.se/Downloads/Magazines/United%20Kingdom/Lantern%20(Ivan%20Bunn)/



The January 1982 "Northern UFO Network Case Summary" on Rendlesham, one of the very early Rendlesham articles. It - and other issues of the same publication - are now online, I think for the first time. Jenny Randles has kindly given permission for me to upload these. I have uploaded searchable PDF copies of issues 1, 3 and 4. (I'm missing issue 2 at the moment...). Issue 1 (in January 1982) was on Rendlesham and was 6 pages long. This is another of several early items on Rendlesham usually overlooked when people recount relevant publications. It discusses how Jenny and Brenda first learned of events at Rendlesham and the initial steps taken by them, Dot Street and others (including a few details not mentioned, I think, in later publications).





The first mainstream magazine article?? The March 1983 issue of Omni magazine included an article (below) on Rendlesham, featuring comments attributed to Colonel Ted Conrad, Donald Moreland, Dot Street and Jenny Randles. All of Omni is online, at the link below: 



The first negative article on Rendlesham?? Ian Mrzyglod kindly gave permission for me to upload all of The Probe Report a while ago (at the link below), which includes the 5 page article on Rendlesham in the April 1983 issue (Volume 3, No 4). http://files.afu.se/Downloads/Magazines/United%20Kingdom/Probe%20Report%20(Ian%20Mrzyglod)/






Here are small thumbnails of the items in the collection at the time of first posting this item in November 2018.







Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Unfair and misconceived reporting of alleged $37 million “debt” accrued by Tom Delonge’s To The Star’s Academy [“TTSA”]


I've posted some comments about Tom DeLonge in the past which were rather critical of (e.g. about excessive hype and his performance on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast number 1029 in October 2017…), but in the last few days I think some of the attacks on his company, To The Stars Academy, have ignored the detail of the content of relevant financial accounts (yawn) and accounting principles (_yawnnnnn_). 

DeLonge, again, hasn’t exactly helped himself but I feel that I should – just this time – explain a few points that actually back him up. 

I know this stuff is a bit tedious,  but -  hey – ufology and related matters don’t always just involve watching 10 second clips of flying saucers/triangles on Youtube. I’m try to keep the most boring stuff to footnote. 

[Footnotes in a blog/Facebook post??!  I may get banned for this since I seem to be breaking an unwritten rule on the Internet…]

Some of the relevant headlines in the last few days have, quite simply, been wrong. For example, the “Motherboard” website posted an article entitled “Tom DeLonge's UFO Organization Is $37.4 Million In Debt" [see Footnote 2].  (Edit : The Motherboard website has posted a correction while I've been writing this lengthy item - but the correction is wrong as well. :)  The word "debt" has been picked up and repeated in numerous other stories anyway...).







These articles have been prompted by reading (or misreading) the content of the latest financial statement filed by TTSA with the SEC (i.e. the Securities and Exchange Commission). Those accounts are at the link in Footnote 1 below. 

That SEC filing include the following [Footnote 1, at bottom of page 13]:

“.,,,The Company has incurred losses from operations and has an accumulated deficit at June 30, 2018 of $37,432,000. These factors raise doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.



As explained below, however, that SEC filing does:
(1)  _NOT_ show that TTSA has a debt of $37 million;
(2) _NOT_ show that TTSA has spent $37 million;
(3) _NOT_ show that TTSA has borrowed $37 million.

Some of those defending Tom DeLonge on the basis that large expenditure is normal for a start-up are implicitly accepting that $37 million has been spent. It hasn’t. Questions about “what has $37 million been spent on” are based on the equally flawed premise that $37 million has been spent. Again, it hasn’t.

Tom DeLonge has posted an attack on one of those articles that was not altogether coherent (and subsequently deleted). That attack suggested that the author of the article should have contacted him first, which is a bit rich since DeLonge and TTSA have rarely responded to anyone I know that has questioned him/TTSA about anything, rather than just posting adulation of him. Also, relevant discussion had been posted online for several days beforehand and TTSA had done nothing to explain itself.  

But I think his main points are (this particular time, on this specific point…) largely right, as I’ll explain below.

The problem is that some of those attacking DeLonge/TTSA are conflating the meaning of the word “debt” and the word “deficit”. They are different words for a reason – they mean different things. J A “deficit” can arise in accounts for a range of reasons. When considering the impact of a deficit, it is – I’m afraid – necessary to look at how the deficit arose. So, let’s do that below.

The meaning of the word “debt” is that something is owed, usually money, by one party to another.  [See Footnote 3]

Quite simply, TTSA’s filed accounting documents do _not_ show that it owes $37 million to anyone.

Instead, those accounts refer to a “deficit”. This is quite different.

The word “deficit” has various meanings, but in an investing context the gist of those meanings is to refer to a loss, or an excess of expenditure/liabilities above income/assets over a period [Footnote 4].  

Before looking at TTSA’s financial statements in relation to the $36 million “deficit”, let’s try a rather simplified hypothetical example.  I’ll take things to extremes to make them – hopefully – clearer and easier to think about. Imagine Bob writes books. Bob forms a company (“Imaginary Incorporated”) to sell those books. For a decade, Imaginary Incorporated sells 1,000 copies of those books each year, at a price of $11 and with costs of production of $1 – giving a profit per book of $10, i.e. $10,000 profit a year.  Then Bob meets Dave. Dave says he is close to finding the cure for cancer. In return for Dave’s assigning rights over the “cure” to Bob’s company (and working as a consultant on finalising the details of that cure), Imaginary Incorporated gives Dave a right to buy 1% of shares in that company at any point in the next 10 years for $1 million [see Footnote 5 if you don’t know about stock/share options]. At the end of the year, when Bob fills in the accounts for Imaginary Incorporated he has to put in a value for the option that the company has given Dave. Imaginary Incorporated has given something away so it has to account for an expenditure/liability in relation to what it has given away. How much was that option worth? Well, the full answer involved applying a financial model/equation known as the “Black-Scholes model” [Footnote 6]. But, just to simplify things a tad, you have to consider what the shares are likely to be worth during that the period during which the option can be exercised. One common way of valuing a company is to look at the annual profits it has made and then apply a multiple (which tends to vary) to that annual profit. To keep the maths simple, let’s take a multiple of 10 – so the value of the company would be 10 times the annual profit of $10,000 – giving  a value of $100,000. On that basis, unless the value of the company were to change dramatically, a right to buy 1% of the company for £1 million would basically be a joke, worth nothing. But in this hypothetical example Bob thinks the company will, or at least might, be worth $100 billion during the next 10 years after developing the cure for cancer and other anticipated benefits. If that expectation were realistic, then a right to buy 1% of the shares (i.e.a value of $1 billion) for the mere price of $1 million would be a valuable right – worth millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars. So, when filling in the accounts, Bob fills in an expenditure/transfer of say $100 million in relation to the option it gave Dave. Imaginary Incorporated made its usual $10,000 profit on the sale of books but because of it giving away a right to buy shares it, for accounting purposes at least, has suffered a loss of millions of dollars based on Bob’s valuation of that right. Note, Imaginary Incorporated has not spent millions of dollars, it has not borrowed millions of dollars, it is not in debt for millions of dollars and – indeed – it never had millions of dollars. Imaginary Incorporated made its usual $10,000 profit on the sale of books but because of it giving away a right to buy shares it, for accounting purposes at least, has suffered a loss of millions of dollars based on Bob’s valuation of that right. Note, Imaginary Incorporated has not spent millions of dollars, it has not borrowed millions of dollars, it is not in debt for millions of dollars and – indeed – it never had millions of dollars. Imaginary Incorporated made its usual $10,000 profit on the sale of books but because of it giving away a right to buy shares it, for accounting purposes at least, has suffered a loss of millions of dollars based on Bob’s valuation of that right. Note, Imaginary Incorporated has not spent millions of dollars, it has not borrowed millions of dollars, it is not in debt for millions of dollars and – indeed – it never had millions of dollars.

Alternatively, imagine that Bob manages – after a fairly intensive global effort - to persuade a few desperate cancer sufferers to buy a tiny, tiny fraction of the shares in Imaginary Incorporated for a total combined investment of US$ 1 million. On the basis of a straight-line extrapolation, the entire company would then be worth billions and the option given to Dave would again – on that accounting basis – be worth millions of dollars. Of course, one could legitimately question whether a straight-line extrapolation would be meaningful in these circumstances since there would be no real prospect of all the shares in Imaginary Inc being sold for billions of dollars as things stood in this hypothetical example…

Okay, let’s turn to the financial statements for DeLonge’s To The Stars Academy. TTSA’s semi-annual period for the period ending 30 June 2018 (filed on 26 September 2018) can be found online at the link in Footnote 1, which is:

Those accounts show relatively little cash being used in operating activities (less than $1 million) [Footnote 1, at page 7] and proceeds from issuing shares also being in the region of just $1 million [Footnote 1, at page 7].  



So, where do the sums of millions of dollars come in?

Page 4 of TTSA’s latest SEC filing [at the link in Footnote 1] refers to “stock-based compensation expense” of “$4,791,042 for Interim 2018” and “$24,744,757 for Interim 2017”.  The SEC filing states that this relates to the vesting of “stock options and restricted stock units”.



Page 11 of TTSA’s SEC filing [at the link in Footnote 1] indicates that – after considering administrative and marketing costs (but excluding stock-based compensation for a moment) – TTSA’s operations have made  a relatively modest, albeit possibly (probably??) unsustainable, loss [less than $1 million] in the period to 30 June 2018. The muliti-million dollar loss arises when you add in the figure for “stock-based compensation”.



Page 16 of TTSA’s SEC filing [at the link in Footnote 1] is the key bit so far as the apparently huge deficit is concerned. That bit includes the following:


[BEGIN QUOTE FROM PAGE 16 OF SEC FILING]
“Stock Based Compensation
 The Company uses ASC 718 and ASC 505 for stock-based compensation. Compensation for all stock-based awards, including stock options and restricted stock, is measured at fair value on the date of grant and recognized over the associated vesting periods. The fair value of stock options is estimated on the date of grant using a Black-Scholes model. The fair value of restricted stock awards is estimated on the date of the grant based on the fair value of the Company’s underlying common stock. For employees, the Company recognizes compensation expense for stock options and restricted stock awards on a straight-line basis over the associated service or vesting periods. For non-employees, the stock-based awards are valued at the value of the stock award on the date the commitment for performance has been reached or their performance is complete. As of June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, all non-employee awards had similar vesting terms to those of employees. Determining the grant date fair value of options using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires management to make assumptions and judgments. These estimates involve inherent uncertainties and, if different assumptions had been used, stock-based compensation expense could have been materially different from the amounts recorded."
[END QUOTE FROM PAGE 16 OF SEC FILING]




Let’s break that down. 

The value attributed to the stock options and stock awarded as compensation to employees and non-employees is valued according to ASC 718 and ASC 505. ASC stands for “Accounting Standards Codification” and sets out generally accepted accounting practices in the USA [Footnote 7].  ASC 718 contains provisions relating to, among other things, share-based payments to employees (see Footnote 8, para 2.1.3). ASC 505 includes provisions relating to, among other things, share-based payments with nonemployees (see Footnote 8, para 8.2 and illustrative examples in para 9.6).  

So, the multi-million dollar aspect of the deficit relates to assumptions made when valuing the stock and/or stock options given to employees and non-employees. TTSA has put, um, high values on both. This makes it look in their filing like it has given assets worth huge sums away to employees and non-employees. Of course, if different assumptions were made as to the values of the stock and/or stock options then the value of the assets given away could be much, much less. In any event, the assets are stocks and/or stock options – not cash or any assets TTSA has bought. TTSA has, in effect, just given part of _itself_ away (or, in relation to the stock option, given away the right for others to buy part of TTSA _itself_ at a set price within a certain period).  

More details of the relevant stocks and stock options are given on pages 21-22 of TTSA’s latest SEC filing (at the link in Footnote 1). Those pages again contain a statement that “Determining the appropriate fair value of stock-based awards requires the input of subjective assumptions, including the fair value of the Company’s common stock, and for stock options, the expected life of the option, and expected stock price volatility”



I think that the statement in TTSA’s latest SEC filing that TTSA has “incurred losses from operations and has an accumulated deficit at June 30, 2018 of $37,432,000” must be understood in the context of those other parts of the SEC filing.  Similarly, the statement that ”These factors raise doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern” also must be understood in the context of high values being attributed to stock compensation being given to employees and non-employees. In effect, someone has said, hey, if you’ve given away assets in the shape of TTSA stock and stock options which are (supposedly) worth millions and millions of dollars to get services in the last year or so, how are you going to keep those people happy in the future – are you going to give them more assets (supposedly) worth millions and millions of dollars? But this is all premised on the company having a huge value.

Thus, as stated in my introduction above, the SEC filing does:
(1)  _NOT_ show that TTSA has a debt of $37 million;
(2) _NOT_ show that TTSA has spent $37 million;
(3) _NOT_ show that TTSA has borrowed $37 million.

To that extent, I think that some of the reports and comments online in relation to on DeLonge/TTSA have been misconceived and unfair. Even many of TTSA’s supporters have given defences that are based on misconceptions as to TTSA having “spent” tens of millions of dollars. It hasn’t.



Footnote 1: TTSA semi-annual report to the SEC for period to 30 June 2018 (filed on 26 September 2018):

Footnote 2 : “Tom DeLonge's UFO Organization Is $37.4 Million In Debt”:

Footnote 3 : Definitions of the word “debt” –

Footnote 4 : Meaning of “deficit” in investing context:

Footnote 4 : Basic introduction to stock options:

Footnote 6 : Basic introduction to the “Black-Scholes model”

Footnote 7 : Basic introduction to ASC

Footnote 8 : Ernst & Young 443 page guide to “Share-based payment”