No one ever said the official language of the OTC is wrong. It was simply explained that the filing was late (now by 8 days) and the reason why. I identified 4 false statements in your last few posts with verifiable information to back it up. See below:
I never said there was any good news in having a yield sign. I said and posted evidence to back it up, that you posted verifiably false information that the company had not posted results for over 6 months with multiple exclamation points. Here was part of my post for information:
You also state falsely that "This scam with $147 in the bank has no UNAUDITED reports for over 6 months!!! "
FACT is that by OTC guidelines, the quarterly report ending 12/31/16 was due on about 2/15/17 which makes the report 8 days late. Your statement that no reports are filed for over 6 months is verifiably false proven by the filing date of 11/24/16 for the quarter ending 9/30/16. Note that it is not even 5 months since the end of the 9/30/16 quarter and less than 3 months since the previously filed results. Indeed if it had been over 6 months a stop sign would be present, which it is not.
I suggest taking more care to actually check so called "FACTS" to avoid misleading readers to a predetermined false conclusion of "scammers and co-conspirators" based on verifiably false information.
Now, incredibly this post contains 3 more verifiable lies in short order:
1. I am accused of stating that there is good news about the yield sign
2. Company is "broke"
3. "Not trading"
I explained the first point above, never said it. Broke, a synonym for bankrupt, means liabilities exceed assets, which is not true. Finally, stock not trading is another lie. There is a bid and ask quoted on an ongoing basis. Contrary to accusations of insiders dumping at every turn, there has been little volume precisely because insiders are not selling. I suspect all are waiting on news from India regarding progress on approval of Sucanon and on the study results. In my opinion the repeated posting of verifiably false information is symptomatic of a notorious scam, so much so that it is laughable except for the serious implications of such actions
Interestingly, any information that actually challenged OTC requirements it has been your very own posts that called every unaudited company on otcmarkets.com a scam and warned of loss of college funds, divorce, and suicide. Further, it was suggested that ROTH post information well in excess of OTC requirements, posting the entire contractual documents with other companies and posting in real time the owners name, date and price paid for all shares. As I pointed out no company ever does that and you are welcome to disprove that fact by listing the information in real time for any company of your choice. Until then I will post as fact only publicly verifiable information as I have promised
