SEC Company Response from ROBOGROUP TEK LTD (CIK 0000743399) — Aug 22, 2005
ROBOGROUP TEK LTD (CIK 0000743399)
Date: Aug. 22, 2005 · CIK: 0000743399 · Accession: 0001178913-05-001193
AI Filing Summary & Sentiment
Referenced dates: August 15, 2005
Show Raw Text
CORRESP
1
filename1.htm
CORRESP
YIGAL ARNON & CO.
ADVOCATES AND NOTARY
Tel Aviv
August 22, 2005
Ref.
8116 (5)
Direct Dial:
+972-3-608-7864
Direct Fax:
+972-3-608-7714
E-mail:
adrian@arnon.co.il
Filed with Edgar
Mr. Martin F. James
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549
Re: RoboGroup T.E.K. Ltd.
Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Annual Report")
Filed June 30, 2005
File No. 0-19435
Dear Mr. James:
On
behalf of RoboGroup T.E.K. Ltd., an Israeli Company (the "Company"), set forth
below are the Company's responses to the comments (the "Comments") of the staff of
the Division of Corporation Finance (the "Staff") transmitted by letter dated August
15, 2005 (the "Comment Letter").
For
the convenience of the Staff, we have restated in this letter each of the Comments in
the Comment Letter and numbered each of the responses to correspond with the numbers of
the Comments in the Comment Letter.
Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004
Consolidated Financial Statements
Independent Auditor's Report, page F-2
1.
We
see that your auditors' report relies on the audit reports issued by other
independent public accountants for certain consolidated subsidiaries as of and of
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004. Please amend your Form
20-F to include the reports of the other accountants as required by Rule 2-05 of
Regulation S-X.
YIGAL ARNON & CO.
Response: The
Company advises the Staff that it has added the required disclosure at pages F-2a and
F-2b of the financial statements for the Company for the year ended December
31, 2004 included in Amendment No. 1 to the Company's Annual Report on Form 20-F/A.
Note
1 - General, page F-10
2.
We
note that you have significantly reduced the activity of MemCall and that
beginning in 2004, the subsidiary has become operationally inactive. Until 2003,
MemCall was accounted for as an individual business sector. Tell us how you
considered whether MemCall should be reported as a discounted operation under
paragraphs 41-44 of SFAS 144 for U.S. GAAP purposes.
Response:
As
mentioned in Note 6B to the financial statements, the activities of MemCall were
significantly reduced in the year ended December 2004.
However,
the Company considered that MemCall should not be reported as a discontinued
operation since there was no intention to totally (or almost totally)
dispose of the activities. The reasons for the manner of reporting MemCall's
operations in the Company's financials for the year ended December 31,
2004, were that MemCall continued its efforts to attract strategic partners
as well as potential customers for its products. In this context, MemCall
searched for alternative ways to implement solutions required by potential customers. The Company considered that a decrease, even a
serious decrease, in the activities of MemCall did not necessarily indicate a
discontinued operation when there were still reasonable prospects to renew
the activities, even if under a new framework. The Company considered that
these facts indicated that condition (b) of parag. 42 of SFAS 144 (i.e. the entity will
not have any significant continuing involvement in the operations of the
component) was not met as of December 31 2004, nor as of March 28, 2005.
The Company advises the Staff that in this regard, it has added additional disclosures to Part A of
Item 4 of Amendment No. 1 to the Company's Annual Report on Form 20-F/A.
Kindly
contact the undersigned at +972-3-608-7864, if you have any questions or require
additional information.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Adrian Daniels
cc:
Mr.
Hanan Eibushitz, Chief Financial Officer
Ms. Vicky Zamir-Sharon, Corporate
Attorney and Secretary
- 2 -