jimstock, that "spike" in sept 09, was due mostly to just a few transactions (about 3 really). its a misconception that there was a "run" in september 2009. it was not due to unaudited financials in my opinion. look at the charts for 9/22/09 and 9/23/09.
i think those handful of trades are what helped give some short-lived credibility (to the seasoned traders) to the rumors of a reverse merger and some other fantasies about what cysg has been up to or is about to do.
are people really expecting the *audited* numbers to be THAT different from the *unaudited* numbers released 9/09? If they were so different, that would in essence, have been fraud on CYSG's part in the the 9/09 unaudited numbers.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.