I've looked through and compared each one and they've added quite a few things on each article.
In the one amended August 3, 2010
The whole F-1 section was modified and added quite a bit
Page 28 of that same S-1/A file
This was added:
23.1* Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
In the late August 25, 2010S-1/A Page 25, the Underwriting form was drastically modified-and is the only thing changed from the earlier august amendment:
UNDERWRITING
We are not engaging an underwriter to assist us in this offering. This offering is being made solely through our officers and directors. Pursuant to Rule 3a4-1, our officers and directors are not considered to be acting as brokers as a result of their participation in this Offering. At the time of this Offering, each officer and director participating in this offering:
1. Is not subject to a statutory disqualification, as that term is defined in section 3(a)(39) of the Act, at the time of his participation; and 2. Is not compensated in connection with his participation by the payment of commissions or other remuneration based either directly or indirectly on transactions in securities; and 3. Is not at the time of his participation an associated person of a broker or dealer; and 4. Meets the conditions of paragraph (a)4(ii) of Rule 3a-1.
What does this all mean? Well, for sure, they're responding to the SEC's wants, but they haven't filed a new S-1/A to correct any other amendments. And apparently we won't know until the late august amendment get's accepted or they submit a new S-1/A.
It makes me wonder what's required of the S-1 that's missing from their current one.
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.