Almost every company at this stage of the game includes a boilerplate Going Concern statement with their financials. It basicly says that "We could go out of business at any time" so be warned before investing. So needless to say I found this comment in the Nature of Operations very interesting indeed.
The Corporation’s ability to fund the strategic development that is currently being put into place has always depended on the ability of management to raise capital and issue debt in the market and this continues to be the case. On the basis of this, ,and after prior discussion with auditors, management does not deem there is a necessity for a going concern note in these accounts.
Why would management choose NOT to include the boilerplate "Going Concern" even as a CYA move? And why would the auditors be OK with it?
It seems to me that either Mint expects to be self funding in the very near term, or they have found a Sugar Daddy (MLC?) that will provide whatever funding is necessary.
This was the "Going Concern" note that has been used in previous financials.
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis,
which assumes that the Corporation will continue in operation for the foreseeable future and will be
able to realize its assets and discharge its liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business.
The Corporation has accumulated a deficit of $21,469,492 as at August 31, 2011. Historically, the
Corporation has financed its operating and capital requirements through issuances of debt and equity.
The Corporation’s continuation as a going concern is dependent upon, among other things, a return to
profitable operations and the generation of cash from operations as well as the ability to settle new
financing arrangements and secure new capital.