You state "LOL this fraud has almost $3 million in losses"
The nearly $2.9 million figure listed in quarterly financial reports is a "loss carry forward" and allows the company to pay no tax on the first $2.9 million of future profits. For those not familiar with accounting rules, this loss carry forward was used by (now US President) Donald Trump about 10 years ago to offset profits and led to accusations of him "not paying" or "avoiding" taxes. However, it is an established rule and a big advantage going forward for this company as the first $2.9 million in profits can be used to further grow the business rather than go toward taxes.
"And you want to make the argument that the losses mounting for this scam in Mexico are around 83% not 90% WOW Lol"
No, that is not the argument at all. First, the original accusation had nothing to do with losses. It was that "sales in Mexico are down 90%-FACT. It turns out that it has been repeatedly shown that the 90% figure is definitively false using 4 years of annual sales and the last 6 or so quarterly sales numbers posted and analyzed giving the maximum benefit of the doubt to find a 90% decline anywhere and it is not there. Oldbiohfguy was very generous in his analysis (post 9553) presenting the best argument of both sides which is what readers should have in making an informed investment decision. Those numbers are detailed in post 9553 and show a decline from 2014 to 2015 and sales trending back up since on a yearly basis and not "tanking" as falsely described. It was also pointed out that if the "sales down 90%", "no labs", and "no pharma" was misleading then the rest of the information may be suspect as well. I agree with that concern, particularly since there have been multiple examples of previously false statements about this company, of which a few examples are listed below with citations based on publicly verifiable information:
1. Modifying a Consumer Reports article in post 4477 and in many following posts to falsely indicate Sucanon as one of the supplements warned about improper advertising by the FDA when it was not and has not been sold in the US.
2. Stating that Sucanon in post 3963 contains only inactive ingredients despite the active ingredients being publicly stated, in one location directly above the cut and pasted inactive ingredients listed on the healthcanada website.
3. Misrepresenting the contents of the FDA response letter by leaving out their clear statements that Sucanon is a drug per the food and drug act, that Sucanon has undergone "substantial clinical investigations" as they reference the press release announcing presentation of a 12 week study of Sucanon in prediabetics in which 81% showed normalized HbA1C at the conclusion and that the study was presented at the 2013 EASD annual meeting and the abstract included in the EASD journal.
4. Stating falsely that Canagen (the Sucanon distributor for India, a multinational company) is a fake company and located in a diner.
5. Then stating in post 5014 that "I stand behind all those statements about this indefensible fraud"
6. The stated purpose of the modification to the Consumer Reports article was for "scaring others away" (post 4550)
7. Stating falsely that "HSBC has no substantial agreement with these crooks". The agreement with HSBC was announced in a press release 5/3/2016 and finances ongoing Sucanon orders in Mexico.
8. Stating falsely that sales in Mexico are down 90% which has been repeatedly disproven based on published quarterly and yearly revenues at otcmarkets.com
9. Posting as fact information from scam.com and further stating that you "stand behind" the information as true.
10. Posting verifiably false information from hotstocked.com and modified with continued false information on share sale prices and amounts.
If the company were really a "health and financial scam" as claimed, it would be unnecessary to use false information in an attempt to make that argument.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
