Replies to post #51757 on First American Scientific Corp. (fka FASC)

[sunspotter]

"I guess this means that the best case scenario is that the wait is two years"

I hesitate to answer this factually because it might give you grounds for optimism which I feel is really not warranted here.

However, I understand those two years can be retrospective, in other words it could be the accounts for 2013 and 2014. If they are audited and reliable, then they could in theory form the basis for a relisting.

So the rate limiting step is generating enough income to pay for those audited accounts.

In reality a set of audited accounts shouldn't cost that much, especially if there are proper unaudited accounts to work from. For a simple business like FASC with apparently minimal turnover, it should be a five figure sum, as I'm sure a CPA familiar with company accounts such as integral could confirm.

And real businesses tend to keep some form of reliable accounts, otherwise they have no idea of who, what, how much and when to invoice, how to run payroll, when to pay bills, what their balance sheet looks like etc. etc.

So in theory it's not as bleak as you may think.

In practise, it's even bleaker.

If Brian Nichols was the slightest bit serious about, or capable of, looking after the interests of his retail shareholders, he simply wouldn't have let things get to the stage where FASC was suspended.
It's not as if he wasn't warned about the consequences, including by the SEC themselves.