DD Support Board and Research Team

[loanranger]

Just for the sake of argument.....I haven't thought this through, but wouldn't this just transfer the cost of avoiding these frauds to people who had better sense than to be drawn in by them:

"The obvious answer is to get rid of the Pink Sheets altogether and require all public companies to be fully reporting to the SEC."

There is no doubt that many Pink Sheet stocks suffer inadequate and sometimes downright fraudulent reporting. Otcmarkets.com doesn't want to police the issue and can't reasonably be expected to. So some crooks are getting rich and some people, many of whom don't have any investing expertise and are looking for a return a notch above the lottery are getting mugged. At the same time, there are examples, and not just a couple, of fully reporting small cap companies perpetrating the same mugging. The SEC can't keep up with them all NOW.
So the SEC would have to do some very serious gearing up to address your idea at a cost to the taxpayers, many of whom are not market participants. And a bunch of the people you are trying to save will return to the lottery or their local bookie. Some might even open an IRA and put their previous crapshoot money in bonds or CD's. And others will undoubtedly find value in some of the newly-reporting, yet destined-for-failure companies that the new policy will obviously create. There cannot be no losers.....whether they be companies or investors.

There are plenty of examples of where we ask government to protect some people from their own stupidity, something that history suggests can't be done, and funding the process at least in part with the hard-earned money of people who acted more responsibly. Some we need and all are expensive. Where does this plan fall?