Absolutely false. The misrepresentation was clearly pointed out in my post. And that was that several exes claimed that "managment expenses" of TPRF took up 56% of its income. In fact, "managment expenses" are more like 5% as clearly pointed out on TPRF's web page.

The first thing to address is why people may not be willing to take TPRF's statements at face value, there are two reasons.

No, the first thing to addresss and admit is that exes deliberately falsified TPRF figures to try to damage their credibility and continue to try to justify it.
And you are trying to muddy the waters.

Firstly the thirty years of hidden funding by so many Rawat related organisations - just because an organisation doesn't have to publish its accounts, doesn't mean it shouldn't do so - has left many of us very suspicious of the competence of their managers. Secondly, like all other Rawat related organisations there is no independent representation on the Board of Management nor is there an active membership to which the board is answerable. The TPRF board is made up of long term Rawat supporters - one is married to a lawyer who is said to have acted personally for Rawat and has certainly had a private business relationship with Rawat via a SEVA Corp. subsidiary. Another board member has been closely involved with the Amaroo development in which Rawat has a huge personal interest. It may well be the case that nothing 'illegal' has taken place but no self respecting philanthropic organisation would put itself in the position of being so lacking in independence. A third issue arises from this narrow Board membership - TPRF is claiming to have 'Humanitarian' purpose - to be effective in this field requires the Board to have independent and experienced members - that is experienced in the actual work of delivering humanitarian aid and services.

The issue isn't the board, the issue I raised was that exes have deliberately falsified TPRF figures and refuse to retract them.
TPRF was created by Prem Rawat to promote his message, it naturally follows that its board members are people who have some interest and experience in that goal.
Your claim that " no self respecting philanthropic organisation would put itself in the position of being so lacking in independence" is completely absurd.
Most non profit, philanthropic organisations are created, staffed, directed and supported by people who are deeply involved in the organisation's goals.

Premies can complain about the motives and intentions of the TPRF Board being questioned - but the present Board has only itself to blame; the resolution of the questionable status of TPRF is easily achieved - appointment of independent and experienced charity administrators to its Board.

I didn't object about people questioning the board, I objected that exes would deliberately falsify TPRF figures and continue to try to justify it.
It isn't the TPRF board that is questionable, it is exes.

The second thing to get to grips with is the presentation of information and accounts. What premies, particularly those closely involved with the Rawat organisations seem to have a great problem with, is grasping the fact that organisations  that claim to have charitable purpose are publicly accountable. If an organisation does not explain itself properly - the fault lies with it - not the public that receives the information. It should not be necessary to have to know the meaning of special terms or understand the principles of accountancy to be able to grasp what an organisation is actually doing with its money. If the Board of TPRF wants to be better understood - then it should be clearer and give more details in the presentation of its accounts.

This is so funny. You say a person shouldn't need" to know the meaning of special terms or understand the principles of accountancy to be able to grasp what an organisation is actually doing with its money"?
I would have thought it wise to know something before you decide to tell people what it all means.
In fact, the TPRF acccounts are perfectly clear, the problem is that no exes bothered to read them.

What Premie Response appears to be complaining about is that some F8 posters have not made a distinction between 'the costs of managing the Foundation' and the 'costs incurred by the Foundation in promoting Rawat'. As the discussion on F8 was about contributions to Humanitarian relief - PR's complaint is fairly irrelevant - the actual costs that go to Rawat related stuff  massively outweigh anything that goes to Humanitarian activities.

Fairly irrelevant? Exes misrepresented TPRF's figures to claim that 56% of any money given to the Tsunami relief fund would go to running the Foundation.
That is an outrageous lie and cannot possibly be defended.

Still lets acknowledge that on paper TPRF costs very little to run -

Wow. That must have hurt.

however as no information on salaries and overheads is published we have no way of knowing what costs are allocated where.

Well, you shouldn't have said that 56% of income goes to "managment expenses".

The TPRF figures for 2003 show Expenses of $971,934 of which 9% went on marketing ($87,470), 20% on Print Materials ($194,387), and 43% on Production ($417,932).
A figure of 1% is given for Charitable - not otherwise defined and equal to a mere $9,719 and somewhat less than the $45,596 acknowledged as admin costs.

So I am right!

Hopefully that clears up the issue raised by Premie Response - if those who have commented on TPRF feel they have done so unfairly no doubt they will apologise.

No, what is really needed is that the people who posted the lies should post an apology and retraction.

I've got three questions for Premie Response - or anyone else who thinks they have an answer.
Why when TPRF offers all it's material for download is it spending nearly $200,000 per annum on printing ?

Presumably because some people see a need for printed material.

Given that over 40% of its income is going toward 'Production' - does TPRF pay any licensing or other fees connected with copyright to any other entity ?

Why don't you ask them.

Does TPRF have a commercial relationship with any subsidiary of Elan Vital or private company, from which Prem Rawat, members of his family or individuals who hold positions in either TPRF or Elan Vital derive income or other benefit ?

I'm sure many people get paid to record, write, translate, photograph, design, layout, print and distribute TPRF material.