Replies to post #39253 on Phoenix Associates Land Syndicate (fka PBLSQ)

[sawdin]

I've go to run...but one quick comment: Unlike many established companies that already had audited financials for many years, PBLS was essentially starting from scratch. Also, unlike a company that has been in existence for years and has not dramatically changed, PBLS has increased in complexity greatly over the past few years. Finally, unlike a company that just makes widgets and only has multiple widget factories, PBLS has many disparate parts. My guess is that the cost of complying with Sarb-Ox would be 'above average' given the variables I've just mentioned. Dealing with Sarb-Ox is down the road, if needed.

[sawdin]

One final thought before I head out: PBLS management believes that the level of manipulation is not much different between the OTC and pinksheets. If that is the case, it doesn't make sense to invest large amounts of time, energy and money into makeing a move to the OTC. It is better to try the OTCQX and make a move to something besides the OTC if needed.

[Cutting Corners]

"Well, here's an idea for you. Just suppose their books are in such bad disarray, and reflectng certain unetical, behind the scenes, deals, etc., that filing with Sarbox would cause the whole management team to go to jail. I am NOT saying that is the case, but just put that idea on the "scale of truth" opposite the idea that Sarbox is too expensive. Just consider it!"



"Taking a page from London's popular AIM stock market, Coulson in March created a new tier, called OTCQX, for Pink Sheets-traded companies that agree to file credible disclosures and appoint outside overseers—approved by Pink Sheets—to review them. Of the more than 8,000 companies listed on the Pink Sheets, only 11 have met the requirements and paid the fees to join the OTCQX ranks so far. But Coulson projects that more than 100 will do so by year-end."

Bob

[WhiteSahara]

You and I have polar opposite opinions regarding the OTC/SARBOX versus Pinksheets/OTCQX debate. IMO the OTCQX leadership has positioned themselves as a rapidly growing, revolutionary, forward thinking exchange to surpass the OTC in growth, overall size and the ability to identify the soundness of firms therein. Other than SARBOX mandating that each firm's CEO place his name on the financials, I see no benefits to the reporting it provides. IMO the current OTC/SARBOX system is broken and needs repair, an opinion I share with Alan Greenspan and many others.

The strongest point of the OTCQX is the DAD and PAL system. Micro cap members with now have an advocate with credibility. By accepting only very high quality law and accounting firms, the OTCQX can enable members to maximize their value. Their stringent application creates DAD's and PAL's with immediate plausibility. Though obviously not equal, this system is akin to to larger firms availing themselves to the reputations of Big Four CPA firms. These small firms will create an immediate boost in reputation by aligning with with known reputeable attorneys and accountants. The unbiased DAD's/PAL's provide a second opinion, something the SEC does not. DAD's/PAL's future revenue in this business arena is completely based on their ability to accurately present financials and advice for microcaps.

I see two very different exchanges, one that still has problems with erroneous reporting and is mired in over regulation. Yet another that is taking the best ideas from foreign exchanges to build a more dynamic manageable marketplace. I like the later.

PBLS has been utilizing the accounting services of Dennis Kowalski, a CPA with his own firm prior to his joining of PBLS full time. They have also hired the firm of Mira and Kolena as CPA's to oversee Dennis's work. However, I suppose it's possible that neither know what they are doing.

Again, I see no advantage to PBLS changing exchanges from the QX to the OTC.

Best of luck to you in your investment here.