ScripsAmerica Inc. (SCRCQ)

[coolerheadsprevail]

I believe a restatement of previous numbers is inevitable

LOL, I never said these things will happen or are even likely to happen -- they were simply a list of things that shareholders NEED to see happen in order for market confidence to be restored...

...that being said, I have stated previously that the length of the delays in the filings make it more likely than not that restatements of some sort may occur... ...HOWEVER, I am also convinced that most retail investors don't know what this means...

Given the circumstances, IMO, the restatements are most likely involving one of the following scenarios:

(1)
The approved orders that had been announced in 2014 and/or 2015 did not exist and were fabricated. This is the absolute worst case scenario and would destroy the company and its stock. I have no reason to believe that this was the case but am simply identifying it as one possible -- and it is possible -- scenario. If this were to be revealed to be the case, any last remnants of market confidence would be shattered and SCRC would find it very difficult to continue to exist as a public company.

(2)
The revenue numbers related to transactions between related parties were not properly accounted for, not properly recognized, and not properly recorded. Remember, there is a convoluted relationship between SCRC, its legal counsel, Implex Corp, Main Ave, and PIMD -- not to mention its use of the controversial VIE ("variable interest entity") vehicles). If this were revealed to be the case, the impact is not currently quantifiable as it could be anywhere from modest to devastating.

(3)
The revenue numbers related to approved orders were reported incorrectly based upon US GAAP. This would essentially be a revenue recognition issue and by and large is often simply a matter of timing (i.e. the total amount of revenues in a period may change but the total revenues over a larger period of time remain the same as it is simply shifting some revenues from one period to another due to strict cut-off requirements). If this were revealed to be the case, the impact of this would be nil.


So, given the 3 scenarios, option (3) is clearly the best case scenario, (1) is clearly the worst case scenario, and (2) could be anywhere from a so-so scenario to a FUBAR scenario.

Happy gambling everyone...