News Focus
News Focus
Followers 365
Posts 10142
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 01/06/2005

Re: lakers17 post# 61214

Thursday, 08/31/2006 5:10:15 PM

Thursday, August 31, 2006 5:10:15 PM

Post# of 311080
I agree with you with respect to the audit but disagree with respect to "gem."

I was skeptical as to whether an audit would occur. I've just seen it PR'd too many times in pinkie world. In that sense, I have posted that I'd prefer no audit than an always late audit. I've also posted that I'd prefer a filing under Rule 2-11 so that we get out of the charade of this being an unsolicited pinky and MM's supposedly being unable to have an inventory. It is unnecessary to have an audit to get off unsolicited status. So, from an economics standpoint, I often urge that step to be taken immediately. But, I'll take the audit and it will enhance credibility as almost nothing else would other than that cash dividend LOL.

However, as I've posted often, they have left too many trails in writing, in PR's, in communications of one form or another, such that I am actually a believer now that the audit will occur.

That's why I disagree with your characterization that this is just another pinkie. We have more information here already than 90% of the pinkies. We don't have audited statements but very few pinkies do.

So, I do think it is a "hidden gem," even if it is a discovered by us pinkie players. Getting the audit will enhance credibility as you say and will expose us to those who look at value plays. A move to OTC BB will also expose us to investors beyond the pink penny world.

I don't know any easy 100 baggers. Any time you get one, it ain't easy and it's always a surprise, a nice surprise. As I posted earlier today, I expect this to move big when I least expect it, when frustration on this board grows, when volume decreases and weak hands are selling. That's been the pattern and I believe it continues.

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y