Spectacular Solar Inc (SPSO)

[texkengold]

o really? well here is another recent post to consider with replies.

Somuchcents Sunday, April 21, 2013 12:56:32 AM
Re: ElisComing post# 8166 Post # of 8825

You are right , it is simple to see that NHSh was not compliant. But that is not the point. As I understand it, MS knew NHSH was not compliant but took the view that it could become compliant. MS then discovered that the SEC informed MS that NHSH could never become compliant and had issued notices to that effect, which were not disclosed. After trying to sort it out for some months, MS were informed that the situation would never be correctable. If this proves to be the case would you not agree that MS had to do what they did? I intend to find out through the proper channels. You can go on and make statements based on hearsay but I intend to find out properly. The bashes comments simply help people to by the stock at basement prices, so thanks for that.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=87081325

and the replies are outstanding in one form or another

doughboy2 Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:48:51 AM
Re: Somuchcents post# 8167 Post # of 8825

The proper channels, imo, for a pubco, would be to keep the investors in the know.

You know-transparency.

When did the SEC notify them?

Before or after MK's July 2012 PR?

And we shouldn't have to fly to the UK to inspect the contract.


Respond | View Replies (1)

chiefwiggim24 Sunday, April 21, 2013 10:07:09 AM
Re: Somuchcents post# 8167 Post # of 8825

Quote:
I intend to find out through the proper channels. You can go on and make statements based on hearsay but I intend to find out properly

So you have links and facts to back up your post on the situation?
or is it hearsay?
Ohhh the irony of your post unless you can provide the board with facts and links and if you can TIA and if you cant .....well I guess its hear say.
JMHO


Respond | No replies

ElisComing Sunday, April 21, 2013 10:27:34 AM
Re: Somuchcents post# 8167 Post # of 8825

That's almost as good as my dog ate my homework...

while the SEC might have advised NHSH what needed to be done to become compliant, if they "determined that compliance was impossible" as you say (whatever that means), they would simply revoke the registration of the stock and it would no longer trade--which is a distinct possibility going forward anyway...

hearsay?--my comments are based are SEC filings(actually the lack thereof)

you'll most likely find out IMO that any "undisclosed" notices from the SEC was correspondence dealing with the attempt of NHSH to go dark(Form 15)--an action they were not qualified to undertake and subsequently had to rescind...

good luck with your "proper channels"...





Respond | View Replies (1)

thetruth3333 Monday, April 22, 2013 11:34:16 AM
Re: Somuchcents post# 8167 Post # of 8825

Quote:
If this proves to be the case would you not agree that MS had to do what they did

What did they do? run? yes. rescind? where is the proof? you cannot just say we rescind, there thats it. It dont go like that, they are proper procedures for such a move and they did not do it, no proof has been shown, yet proof the other way, that they are apart of NHS is all over.
And where is this proof they found out later nhs could never be compliant? for I understand that they are making great progress now in doing just that.
-------------------------------------
=====================================
-------------------------------------
jmho