Replies to post #82052 on Sino Agro Food Inc (fka SIAF)

[surfer44]

Sino Agro Food Inc. (SIAF) is a Chinese fraud on a massive scale. Even though SIAF trades on the OTC, they have been able to swindle away millions and millions of dollars away from extremely naïve investors through years and years of fraudulent press releases, always dangling a carrot. It wasn't until the latest charade that I decided to put my foot down in attempting to help prevent the growing shareholder base from being defrauded out of millions more.

While you have some substance in your post what you wrote above is pure crapola fit for a novel. Stick to facts and not flowery language.

[challe08]

I received a call from the company's legal counsel, The Sourlis Law Firm (Joe Patricola & Philip Magri) threatening me with a lawsuit

Haha, don't think you're home free yet. I guess they are gathering all the bs you have been posting on FB and all other places you have been screaming about this. Just wait until things cool down in a while or two, they'll be back chasing you and the junk you repossess, my God I'm looking forward to the day Siaf's lawyers meet you in court, I just have to book a ring-side for that event :-)!!
Please keep on posting, everyone knows who you are....like I said, can't wait!

[weeblewobble09]

Don't forget to add that you bought shares in the stock shortly after filing the claim.

[TrueTrades]

Thank you, joenatural. May I conclude that you never heard back from the SEC for a formal statement and no suit has been filed?
Broadridge indicates they were not the transfer agent during this time. Who was, and were they forthcoming with share structure info?

As far as RHI soliciting investors, so what? They will probably end up with a board seat and do very well for themselves. Hyperboy262626 successfully orchestrated a US investors conference and should be applauded for his/their efforts.

FWIW, my view of that history is a new CN company that attempted to take advantage of US listing opportunities which, unfortunately, included the downside of hired advisers' ulterior motives. Perhaps you could take some credit for the on-going turnaround and give yourself a pat.

Although I have not traveled to view operations in person, I have faith that the audited financial statements of SIAF are genuine and this is an actual high-growth company with a very promising ROI potential. Not a scam.

GLTY
§SIAF

[ccsykes]

Joe,

An auditors engagement includes previous fiscal year audit and review of the subsequent quarterly periods for the following year. These engagements for the most part overlap. So despite the lack of an engagement for the new period, SIAF was still under engagement for review.

The CEO did not intentionally mislead anyone. The CEO simply regarded Madsen's affiliate, who was doing the work described in the PR's, as the "auditor". Technically, they are not one in the same, but the CEO didn't know this. If anything it was a honest mistake.

Had there been any issue with this, it would have received comments by the SEC during the Form 10 review. The SEC does review all Company PR's and communications during a registration statement review. Since the SEC deemed SIAF's Form 10 effective, obviously they had no problems with it. And if the SEC did have a problem with it, it evidently was resolved during the comment period. Additionally, SIAF went through a second review period with the SEC on it's more recent Form S-1, which was withdrawn.

Your arguments would hold water if the Company had not completed the tasks it stated. Were they delayed? Sure, but the Company did manage to clear it's Form 10 at a time that all Chinese Companies were under a microscope by the SEC.

In regards to me representing "pump and dumps". My involvement in RVGD led to the SEC sanction of Steve Carnes. We caught his shenanigans, unfortunately it didn't end well for shareholders. Other clients of mine suffered problems due to poor due diligence of their shells.

Every client I ever worked with it was the people who took the companies public that created the problems. At most, the CEO's were guilty of being naive and I did the best I could to clean up the mess. Of the 6 companies I worked with, SIAF was the only one that didn't have a botched reverse merger.

I learned a lot from that period and took that knowledge and became the first CEO/Company to clear both the SEC and FINRA with a cannabis related IPO.

Lastly, SIAF attorney's did not threaten you with a lawsuit. You threatened SIAF with one and the attorney's simply said they would file a counter-suit deeming yours frivolous.

It may be time to put aside old grudges and move on bro. There's a learning curve for many CEO's and some don't always get it right the first time.