DD Support Board and Research Team

[DragonBear]

Yes, and that April 1 date.

That's an interesting article. However, it has a few weaknesses.

The first is the assumption eligibility and disclosure is stronger on QX and QB. It's suppose to bee, butt...

What is the difference between a DDCC now 1 yr delinquent, and still pumping away vs a pinky which is pumping away? Other than the fact the Pinky doesn't ever have to worry about delisting after 2 yrs?

What is the difference between a TRII that would blurt out anticipated revenue stream in a PR, and then sort of fail to discuss what happened in the next 10K, and... a Pinky that issues a like PR, and doesn't have to account for anything?

In either case the retail investor isn't misjudging non-existent, missing, or false information. There's nothing to judge. The author shouldn't discount lotto pick gambling so much.

The second weakness is the author should have broken out the highest tier, and figure out how many of the stocks were ADRs or legitimate non-penny OTC stocks.

A third weakness is no breakout of how many OTC stocks "graduating" to the big boards where initially a R/S into a Shell. Current SHs get wiped out, and then after reaching the big board are diluted with a huge new stock offering.

Trying to give the SEC cover like this doesn't cut it either:

In their sample, the majority of litigation related to companies quoted on the Pink Sheets centers on delinquent filings with regulators, fraudulent disclosures, illegal distribution of securities, and pump-and-dump schemes

Poor wording at best. The SEC will go after non-Pink delinquent stocks - after giving them 2-3 yrs of free pumping. And fraudulent disclosures, are only gathered up as supporting evidence after an illegal dump is detected. The SEC doesn't get into judging the plausible deniability of PR claims as they come out. As stated above, they don't hold even the filers to the PR claims in a 10K filing. The main criteria for the SEC is whether an illegal dump has occurred, and if they can levy enough fee penalties to make it worth their effort. If not large enough penalty fees, they suspend the stock at best.

We've discussed ad nauseum on this forum, simple rule changes that could stiffle or make it more difficult for these scams to exist. The SEC trying to educate the dreamers is a lost cause. IMO, it's going to get a lot worse in the coming years. The politicians are in a deregulation mode, along with declaring war on big bad gubbermint. The SEC will be getting a budget cut. Where limited resource investigations will be big ticket frauds, and largely ignoring the lowly OTC scams.