Home
Jump to Risk Factors
Jump to Industries
Jump to Exposures
Jump to Event Codes
Jump to Wiki Summary

Industries
Investment Banking and Brokerage
Independent Power Producers and Energy Traders

Exposures
Economic
Military
Judicial
Cooperate
Leadership
Express intent

Event Codes
Military blockade
Solicit support
Yield to order
Sports contest
Release or return
Sanction
Endorse
Agree
Demand
Accident

Wiki	Wiki Summary
Operation Mincemeat	Operation Mincemeat was a successful British deception operation of the Second World War to disguise the 1943 Allied invasion of Sicily. Two members of British intelligence obtained the body of Glyndwr Michael, a tramp who died from eating rat poison, dressed him as an officer of the Royal Marines and placed personal items on him identifying him as the fictitious Captain (Acting Major) William Martin.
Special Activities Center	The Special Activities Center (SAC) is a division of the Central Intelligence Agency responsible for covert operations and paramilitary operations. The unit was named Special Activities Division (SAD) prior to 2015.
Operations management	Operations management is an area of management concerned with designing and controlling the process of production and redesigning business operations in the production of goods or services. It involves the responsibility of ensuring that business operations are efficient in terms of using as few resources as needed and effective in meeting customer requirements.
Emergency operations center	An emergency operations center (EOC) is a central command and control facility responsible for carrying out the principles of emergency preparedness and emergency management, or disaster management functions at a strategic level during an emergency, and ensuring the continuity of operation of a company, political subdivision or other organization.\nAn EOC is responsible for strategic direction and operational decisions and does not normally directly control field assets, instead leaving tactical decisions to lower commands.
Operation (mathematics)	In mathematics, an operation is a function which takes zero or more input values (called operands) to a well-defined output value. The number of operands (also known as arguments) is the arity of the operation.
Bitwise operation	In computer programming, a bitwise operation operates on a bit string, a bit array or a binary numeral (considered as a bit string) at the level of its individual bits. It is a fast and simple action, basic to the higher-level arithmetic operations and directly supported by the processor.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission	The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is an independent agency of the United States federal government, created in the aftermath of the Wall Street Crash of 1929. The primary purpose of the SEC is to enforce the law against market manipulation.: 2 \nIn addition to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which created it, the SEC enforces the Securities Act of 1933, the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and other statutes.
List of United States cities by population	This is a list of the most populous incorporated places of the United States. As defined by the United States Census Bureau, an "incorporated place" includes a variety of designations, including city, town, village, borough, and municipality.
Criminal investigation	Criminal investigation is an applied science that involves the study of facts that are then used to inform criminal trials. A complete criminal investigation can include searching, interviews, interrogations, evidence collection and preservation, and various methods of investigation.
Complaint	In legal terminology, a complaint is any formal legal document that sets out the facts and legal reasons (see: cause of action) that the filing party or parties (the plaintiff(s)) believes are sufficient to support a claim against the party or parties against whom the claim is brought (the defendant(s)) that entitles the plaintiff(s) to a remedy (either money damages or injunctive relief). For example, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that govern civil litigation in United States courts provide that a civil action is commenced with the filing or service of a pleading called a complaint.
No Complaints	"No Complaints" is the debut solo single by American record producer Metro Boomin featuring American rapper Offset of Migos and Canadian rapper Drake. The song was featured as a bonus track on Metro's debut solo studio album, Not All Heroes Wear Capes (2018).
Complaints and Grievances	Complaints and Grievances is the 17th album and twelfth HBO stand-up special by comedian George Carlin. Its working title was I Kinda Like It When a Lot of People Die, but it was renamed following the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Directorate of Professional Standards	The Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) is a directorate of London's Metropolitan Police Service. The Directorate is responsible for investigating complaints against the professional conduct of Officers, the DPS was a realignment of the Complaints Investigation Bureau (CIB) after changes to the police regulations and the way complaints were handled after the Police Reform Act 2002.
Customer relationship management	Customer relationship management (CRM) is a process in which a business or other organization administers its interactions with customers, typically using data analysis to study large amounts of information.CRM systems compile data from a range of different communication channels, including a company's website, telephone, email, live chat, marketing materials and more recently, social media. They allow businesses to learn more about their target audiences and how to best cater for their needs, thus retaining customers and driving sales growth.
Customer service	Customer service is the provision of service to customers before, during, and after a purchase. This makes it an important part of the value chain of clients.
Lawsuit	A lawsuit is a proceeding by a party or parties against another in the civil court of law. The archaic term "suit in law" is found in only a small number of laws still in effect today.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission	The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal agency that was established via the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to administer and enforce civil rights laws against workplace discrimination.: 12, 21  The EEOC investigates discrimination complaints based on an individual's race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including sexual orientation, pregnancy, and gender identity), age, disability, genetic information, and retaliation for reporting, participating in, and/or opposing a discriminatory practice.The commission also mediates and settles thousands of discrimination complaints each year prior to their investigation. The EEOC is also empowered to file civil discrimination suits against employers on behalf of alleged victims and to adjudicate claims of discrimination brought against federal agencies.
The Walt Disney Company	The Walt Disney Company, commonly known as Disney (), is an American multinational mass media and entertainment conglomerate headquartered at the Walt Disney Studios complex in Burbank, California.\nDisney was originally founded on October 16, 1923, by brothers Walt and Roy O. Disney as the Disney Brothers Cartoon Studio; it also operated under the names the Walt Disney Studio and Walt Disney Productions before changing its name to the Walt Disney Company in 1986.
Holding company	A holding company is a company whose primary business is holding a controlling interest in the securities of other companies. A holding company usually does not produce goods or services itself.
East India Company	The East India Company (EIC) was an English, and later British, joint-stock company founded in 1600. It was formed to trade in the Indian Ocean region, initially with the East Indies (the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia), and later with East Asia.
The Pokémon Company	The Pokémon Company (株式会社ポケモン, Kabushiki gaisha Pokémon) is a Japanese company responsible for brand management, production, publishing, marketing and licensing of the Pokémon franchise, which consists of video game software, a trading card game, anime television series, films, manga, home entertainment products, merchandise, and other ventures. It was established through a joint investment by the three businesses holding the copyright of Pokémon: Nintendo, Game Freak, and Creatures.
The Weather Company	The Weather Company is a weather forecasting and information technology company that owns and operates weather.com and Weather Underground. The Weather Company has been a subsidiary of the Watson & Cloud Platform business unit of IBM since 2016.
The Honest Company	The Honest Company, Inc. is an American consumer goods company, founded by actress Jessica Alba.
The Longaberger Company	The Longaberger Company is an American manufacturer and distributor of handcrafted maple wood baskets and other home and lifestyle products. The company opened in 1973, was acquired in 2013 by CVSL, Inc., and closed in 2018.
List of A Certain Magical Index characters	The following is a list of characters from A Certain Magical Index light novel, manga and anime series, and its side-story manga and anime series titled A Certain Scientific Railgun and A Certain Scientific Accelerator. The series primarily takes place in Academy City, a city filled with students who strove to become powerful espers and were brought into conflict by the appearance of sorcerers.
Board of directors	A board of directors (commonly referred simply as the board) is an executive committee that jointly supervises the activities of an organization, which can be either a for-profit or a nonprofit organization such as a business, nonprofit organization, or a government agency. \nThe powers, duties, and responsibilities of a board of directors are determined by government regulations (including the jurisdiction's corporate law) and the organization's own constitution and by-laws.
Director-General of the World Health Organization	The director-general of the World Health Organization (WHO) is the chief executive officer of WHO and the principal advisor to the United Nations on matters pertaining global health. The director general is elected by and answers to the World Health Assembly (WHA).
Director of Central Intelligence	The Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) was the head of the American Central Intelligence Agency from 1946 to 2005, acting as the principal intelligence advisor to the President of the United States and the United States National Security Council, as well as the coordinator of intelligence activities among and between the various U.S. intelligence agencies (collectively known as the Intelligence Community from 1981 onwards).\nThe office existed from January 1946 to April 21, 2005.
Directors and officers liability insurance	Directors and officers liability insurance (also written directors' and officers' liability insurance; often called D&O) is liability insurance payable to the directors and officers of a company, or to the organization itself, as indemnification (reimbursement) for losses or advancement of defense costs in the event an insured suffers such a loss as a result of a legal action brought for alleged wrongful acts in their capacity as directors and officers. Such coverage can extend to defense costs arising from criminal and regulatory investigations or trials as well; in fact, often civil and criminal actions are brought against directors and officers simultaneously.
Director General of MI5	The Director General of the Security Service is the head of the Security Service (commonly known as MI5), the United Kingdom's internal counter-intelligence and security agency. The Director General is assisted by a Deputy Director General and an Assistant Director General, and reports to the Home Secretary, although the Security Service is not formally part of the Home Office.
NBN Co	NBN Co Limited, known as simply nbn, is a publicly-owned corporation of the Australian Government, tasked to design, build and operate Australia's National Broadband Network as the nation's wholesale broadband provider. The corporation reports to two shareholder ministers: the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Communications.
Consolidated Fund	In many states with political systems derived from the Westminster system, a consolidated fund or consolidated revenue fund is the main bank account of the government. General taxation is taxation paid into the consolidated fund (as opposed to hypothecated taxes earmarked for specific purposes), and general spending is paid out of the consolidated fund.
Consolidated PBY Catalina	The Consolidated PBY Catalina is a flying boat and amphibious aircraft that was produced in the 1930s and 1940s. In Canadian service it was known as the Canso.
Consolidated Edison	Consolidated Edison, Inc., commonly known as Con Edison (stylized as conEdison) or ConEd, is one of the largest investor-owned energy companies in the United States, with approximately $12 billion in annual revenues as of 2017, and over $62 billion in assets. The company provides a wide range of energy-related products and services to its customers through its subsidiaries:\n\nConsolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
Consolidated Communications	Consolidated Communications Holdings, Inc., doing business as Consolidated Communications, is an American broadband and business communications provider headquartered in Mattoon, Illinois. The company provides data, internet, voice, managed and hosted, cloud and IT services to business customers, and internet, TV, phone and home security services to residential customers.

Risk Factors
IMERGENT INC ITEM 1A RISK FACTORS You should carefully consider the following risks before making an investment in our Company
In addition, you should keep in mind that the risks described below are not the only risks that we face
However, additional risks not presently known to us, or risks that we currently believe are not material, may also impair our business operations
You should also refer to the other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the discussions set forth in “Business” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” as well as our consolidated financial statements and the related notes
Our business prospects, financial condition, or results of operations could be adversely affected by any of the following risks
If we are adversely affected by such risks, then the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment
Proposed Federal Trade Commission rules could adversely impact the manner in which we solicit potential customers
On April 5, 2006, the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, announced proposed rules that, if adopted, could be construed or applied in a way that would negatively impact the manner in which we solicit potential customers and offer our customers our products
The FTC is currently requesting comments to the proposed rules
We cannot predict whether the proposed rules will be adopted, or if adopted, whether they would be deemed to apply to us
The proposed rules, if adopted, may be interpreted or applied in a manner that may reduce our revenue and profitability
Changes in international and domestic laws and regulations and the interpretation and enforcement of such laws and regulations could adversely impact our financial results or ability to conduct business
We are subject to a variety of international, federal and state laws and regulations as well as oversight from a variety of international and domestic governmental agencies
The laws governing our business may change in ways that harm our business
Federal, state or foreign governmental agencies administering and enforcing such laws may also choose to interpret and apply them in ways that harm our business
These interpretations are also subject to change
Regulatory action could materially impair or force us to change our business model and may adversely affect our revenue, increase our compliance costs and reduce our profitability
In addition, governmental agencies such as the SEC, IRS or state taxing authorities may find that we have violated federal laws, state laws or their rules and regulations, and we could be subject to fines, penalties or other actions that could materially harm our business
From time to time we are and have been the subject of governmental inquiries and investigations into our business practices that could require us to change our sales and marketing practices or pay damages or fines, which could negatively impact our financial results or ability to conduct business
From time to time, we receive inquiries from federal, state, city and local government officials in the various jurisdictions in which we operate
These inquiries and investigations generally concern compliance with various city, county, state and/or federal regulations involving sales and marketing practices
We have and do respond to these inquiries and have generally been successful in addressing the concerns of these persons and entities, without a formal complaint or charge being made, although there is often no formal closing of the inquiry or investigation
There can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these or other inquiries and investigations will not have a material adverse effect on our business or operations, or that a formal complaint will not be initiated
We also receive complaints and inquiries in the ordinary course of our business from both customers and governmental and non-governmental bodies on behalf of customers, and in some cases these customer complaints have risen to the level of litigation
To date we have been able to resolve these matters on a mutually satisfactory basis
However, there can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse affect on our business or results of operations
On February 14, 2005, the state of Texas notified us of its intent to file an action against us, which was in fact filed on February 21, 2005
The action was against iMergent, Inc, StoresOnline, Brandon Lewis, and Donald Danks, in the District Court for Bexar County, Case Number 2005 CI 02791
The petition alleged that the Company sells a business opportunity and alleged nine instances of fraud over a four-year period
The Company has filed a denial to all allegations
The Company contended that it does not sell a business opportunity under Texas law
The Company further disputed there has been any instances of fraud
On November 29, 2005, the Company and the 9 ______________________________________________________________________ office of the Texas Attorney General announced a settlement whereby the Company agreed to pay a total of dlra400cmam000 into a refund pool to refund certain Texas customers who may file claims and reimburse dlra60cmam000 in legal fees to the Texas Attorney General’s office
If the refund pool is not exhausted by the claims of certain Texas customers, the remaining funds in the refund pool may be applied to the dlra60cmam000 in legal fees, and any remaining funds in the refund pool will go into an educational fund for the state of Texas
The deadline for the filing of claims has now expired, and the agreed reimbursement has been less that dlra340cmam000, accordingly the Company will not be responsible for any further costs of fees
The Company also agreed to certain actions intended to clarify the business practices of the Company
There was no limitation on the Company conducting business in the state of Texas, and there was no material negative impact on the operations of the Company
On March 8, 2005, an action was filed by Elliott Firestone, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, against the Company, certain current and former officers, and certain current and former directors, in the US District Court for the District of Utah Civil Nodtta 2:05cv00204 DB Additional complaints were then filed against the Company alleging similar claims
The court ordered that the cases be consolidated, and on November 23, 2005, allowed a “consolidated amended complaint for violation of federal securities laws” against the Company, certain current and former officers, and certain current and former directors, together with the former independent auditors for the Company, Grant Thornton LLP, as defendants
The amended consolidated complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws claiming that the defendants either made or were responsible for making material misleading statements and omissions, providing inaccurate financial information, and failing to make proper disclosures which required the Company to restate its financial results
The suit seeks unspecified damages, including attorneys’ fees and costs
Although this action was determined by the court to be the “consolidated action”, a complaint was filed in October 2005 by Hillel Hyman on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated against the Company, certain current and former officers, certain current and former directors, and Grant Thornton LLP This group in subsequent filings refers to itself as the “accounting restatement group” and alleges that it should be determined by the court to be the consolidated plaintiff as it properly alleges a class period consistent with timing necessary to raise a claim based upon the restatement of financial results announced by the Company
The complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws by the Company and Grant Thornton LLP The Company disputes the allegations raised in both actions, but has not filed substantive responsive pleadings to the actions
On February 28, 2006, at a “Status Conference” the court determined that the complaint filed by the accounting restatement group should be substituted as the new consolidated amended complaint
On April 3, 2006, the court entered a consent order substituting Mr
The discovery stay imposed under applicable federal law, which controls the administration of class actions, remains in place
There has been no amended complaint filed to date
In addition to the foregoing, there have been stockholder derivative lawsuits filed in the US District Court for the District of Utah as well as the State Court in Utah against the Company, certain officers of the Company, and current and former directors of the Company
The Company has successfully requested delays in filing responses due to the consolidated class action
On March 21, 2005, and subsequent dates, we met with a representative of the Ventura County District Attorney’s (DA) office as well as a representative of the office of the California Attorney General
The Ventura County DA discussed an investigation by that office into whether we were in violation of the California Seminar Sales Act (California Civil Code § 1689dtta20-1693) and the Seller Assisted Marketing Plans Act (California Civil Code § 1812dtta200-1812dtta221) (the “SAMP ACT”)
On September 1, 2006, the parties agreed to a stipulation which provides that the Company pay a total settlement dlra550cmam000
The settlement amount includes payment of dlra200cmam000 to the State of California and to Ventura County for an award of costs, attorney and statutory fees; and dlra350cmam000 to make refunds to certain California customers who may file claims
To the extent that filed claims exceed the balance in the refund account, refunds will be paid on a pro-rata basis
The Company also agreed to take certain actions intended to clarify the business practices of the Company
There is no limitation on the Company conducting business in the state of California, and no obligation for the Company to register under the Seller Assisted Marketing Plans Act
On August 28, 2006, the Utah Department of Commerce Division of Consumer Protection served an Administrative Citation (the Citation) seeking that we register under §13-15 of the Utah Business Opportunity Disclosure Act (the Disclosure Act)
The Citation indicated the maximum potential fine was dlra2cmam500 and the issuance of a cease and desist order
The Company is contesting the Citation and does not intend to register under the Disclosure Act because the Company contends it is not selling a business opportunity
In addition to contesting the Citation, the Company, on August 28, 2006, filed a declaratory action with the United States District Court 10 ______________________________________________________________________ District of Utah, Central Division seeking a declaratory judgment that (1) the Disclosure Act is unconstitutional, or (2) if constitutional, the Disclosure Act does not apply to the Company
On June 1, 2005, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, or ACCC, filed an action against the Company alleging the Company engages in making misleading and deceptive representations
The ACCC obtained an order on an ex-parte basis preventing the Company from transferring certain funds outside the jurisdiction of Australian courts, pending further hearings on the case
At mediation, the parties agreed to a settlement, which has been confirmed by the Court, the settlement resolves all outstanding issues under the order
The Company does not admit any liability, however, the Company has agreed to allow refunds up to a maximum of approximately dlra468cmam000 to certain Australian customers and pay related administrative costs to the ACCC of approximately dlra28cmam000
The refund account is funded entirely by funds presently held as restricted cash under the June 1, 2005 order
If the amount held as restricted funds is not exhausted by the claims of certain Australian customers, the remainder of the account will be returned to the Company
There has been no final accounting of accepted claims
The Company will not pay any other fees, costs or penalties under the settlement agreement
The Company will continue to conduct StoresOnlineTM workshops in Australia
All previous injunctions by the ACCC against the Company have expired
On January 13, 2006, the State of Indiana filed an action against iMergent, Inc
in the Marion Superior Court, Case Number 490070601PL001792
The petition alleges that the Company sells a business opportunity and alleges violations of the Indiana Consumer Protection Act
The Company contends that it does not sell a business opportunity under Indiana law, and further that it has not violated any other Indiana statute
The Company has filed a motion for summary judgment, as it believes the claims are not legally sufficient, and contends as a matter of law that it is not subject to the business opportunity statute
On October 24, 2005, the Company announced it had been notified by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that it had issued a formal order of investigation related to the Company
Prior to the order, the Company had announced a change of the independent registered public accounting firm for the Company
The Company also issued a Form 8-K of Non-Reliance on Previously Issued Financial Statements or a Related Audit Report or Completed Interim Review
The Company is fully cooperating with the SEC in this matter
We also are subject to various claims and legal proceedings covering matters that arise in the ordinary course of business
We believe that the resolution of these other cases will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, or results of operations
We may not prevail in these actions and may be required to pay fines or damages, we may be restricted in our ability to conduct our business in a given market, or be subject to other adverse consequences
In addition, the cooperation in these matters, as well as other litigation or regulatory matters, requires the diversion of our resources, including time and expense, from growing our business
From time to time we are and have been the subject of customer complaints and lawsuits relating to our business practices that could require us to change our sales and marketing practices or pay damages or fines, which could negatively impact our financial results
We sometimes receive complaints and inquiries in the ordinary course of business from both customers and governmental and non-governmental bodies on behalf of customers and, in some cases, these customer complaints have resulted in litigation
The ultimate resolution of these matters may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations
We are the subject of claims alleging violations of federal securities laws, which claims require us to expend significant resources to dispute, and could subject us to significant liability and the requirement to pay damages
Our current and former directors and officers are the subject of stockholder derivative lawsuits and lawsuits alleging violations of federal securities laws
For example, on March 8, 2005, an action was filed by Elliott Firestone, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, against us, certain current and former officers, and 11 ______________________________________________________________________ certain current and former directors, in the US District Court for the District of Utah
Additional complaints were then filed against us alleging similar claims
The court ordered that the cases be consolidated, and on November 23, 2005, allowed a “consolidated amended complaint for violation of federal securities laws” against us, certain current and former officers, and certain current and former directors, together with our former independent auditors, Grant Thornton LLP, as defendants
The amended consolidated complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws claiming that the defendants either made or were responsible for making material misleading statements and omissions, providing inaccurate financial information, and failing to make proper disclosures which required us to restate our financial results
The suit seeks unspecified damages, including attorneys’ fees and costs
We may be required to pay judgments or settlements and incur expenses in amounts that would materially harm our business and financial results