Well articulated questions and hypotheses, Star. High Five to you!!
The SEC is an odd duck, an Agency that suspends many stocks but also ignores the increasing pandemic of scam stocks that are heavily promoted for the singular purpose of selling many millions of shares on fraudulent pumps. There is no apparent or evident pattern to which stocks the SEC chooses to suspend. Known scams can trade for years before the SEC takes corrective action to "protect" investors....kinda laughable after investors have already lost wads of money.
With my limited knowledge of the SEC I do know they can discreetly and informally but directly ask selected delinquent filers to file Financials that the SEC can then scrutinize for accuracy and adequacy. If the company ignores the SEC's informal requests the SEC will likely suspend the stock with a concomitant Administrative Proceeding that demands the delinquent filer to file Financials or face an SEC application to an Administrative Law Judge for revocation. Companies that know they could face SEC charges if they do file Financials that are either inaccurate or are accurate but incriminating to prior Financials usually choose to ignore the SEC's Admin Proceeding despite the predictable revocation that will quickly follow. Presto...problem solved for the delinquent filer if they are a scam, and pesky shareholders lose everything with no recourse.
If the SEC has reason to suspect improprieties by a public company the SEC can suspend without any informal notifications to the subject company whereby the SEC lists their "concerns". Usually these types of suspensions occur when the subject company releases news that is suspected of being false and misleading for the objective of selling vast amounts of shares to unsuspecting investors. PIHN could fall into this category when they released profound news two years ago about Staff Is and then sold, or the promoters sold, or both sold vast amounts of shares into the news....BUT....the news would have to be suspected of being false and misleading before the SEC would get involved. It is not probable that the SEC would look at 2 year-old news releases when maybe the news releases were accurate at that time. The SEC doesn't have the $$ resources, but they could still suspend PIHN on suspicions alone and then let KUNI jump through hoops if he wanted to vindicate himself and Polaris.
Since PIHN has gone more silent than a petrified Mummy over the last 2 years the only things that might pique the SEC's interest are the confounded emails from the CEO to PIHN investors. Were the emails deceptive or were they truthful. Would the SEC even care since no other potential PIHN investors were duped by private emails? Personally I think the SEC only cares about public news releases that are deceptive and fraudulent.
If KUNI has committed any improprieties he failed to capitalize on any sustained pump and dump and hypothetically hasn't committed any egregious Securities Violations. In other words, there are worse offenders 'out there' that are committing Securities Violations at every opportunity.
It is small solace that the only aggrieved PIHN investors are investors from one to 2 years ago who are mired in this stock; investors who trusted CEO KUNI to operate Polaris Holdings responsibly and accountably. I doubt the SEC cares about 'us' as the SEC seems to primarily care about future investor losses from ongoing scams.
I have a hunch the SEC will scrutinize any future PIHN news releases and any Financials if filed, so KUNI had better be 100 % truthful and accurate or this stock would likely get suspended and eventually revoked. Or...he remains aloof and silent as he has been and the SEC puts him and PIHN on the back burner for another year or so.
As remote as it appears it is still possible that KUNI dances to his own drummer and maybe he still runs Polaris / Staff Is as a legitimate business, with or without the purported acquisition. He certainly isn't dancing to our jungle drums no matter how loud investors protest, even to the SEC.
KUNI is a very perlexing CEO. Was his sincerity in his emails a facade to distance himself from his news releases several years ago? Or is KUNI sincere but just incapable of consumating the blinkity-blink acquisition? Or.....will KUNI actually resolve the acquisition one way or the other, file Financials, and demonstrate CEO principles in running this public company and stock with or without the acquisition? Throwing darts at which scenario is our only option, other than phoning anyone who will listen to shareholder grievances, which I fully support, by the way.
Long winded....sorry, but at least it is all encapsulated in one post and not in dozens.
To bite the worm of incite is to bite the HOOK of the antagonist . They win .
