Why would anyone think any nanosux promotion for a charity would actually return anything to the charity?
It was a no-brainer from the git go.
The only thing I know of for a fact and verified that the felon principal did that he said he'd do was the almost unheard of cash dividend from a scam company. He did it out of meanness, sadistic glee and to his narcissistic satisfaction of trying to do something hardly anyone has done. And only after he read it on this board that we couldn't really find an example of a known corrupt company in the pinks pulling off a traditional cash dividend. They almost always do the head fake and sell into the fake news of a dividend.
And to add insult and pain to the already tortured shareholders, the principal of nanosux made all the common shareholders pay at least 20 dollars to their brokers to process his dividend which itself was worth less than 25 cents in total to even the largest shareholder. Most were less than 5 cents worth of dividend. Most if not all real companies cover the expenses of a dividend, unlike nanosux which stiffed the TA and didn't for a dividend process, who in turn has to charge brokerages, who in turn pass it straight to account holders.
To say the principal is a damaged individual is a understatement.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
