Hi Jay Lim,
Good question. I don't know too much about pink sheet stocks, so I'm sure someone else can answer your question more precisely and and more well roundedly than I can. But as I understand it companies can either start off listed as an OTC Pink or get delisted from other exchanges for not complying to the rules of those other exchanges.
In SIAF's case they started off on the pinks. I'm actually not sure/forgot the story of how they first got going as a traded stock/corporate entity. But however a company may get there, they have a choice, like we all do, to comport themselves in a respectable, upright fashion, or use the lack of regulatory strictures to conduct themselves in a shady, underhanded fashion. SIAF management is striving for the former and is reporting far more information to shareholders than they are required to by the standards set forth for pink sheet stocks.
My understanding is that the lack or reduced regulatory strictures imposed on pink sheet stocks is, ideally, a means to let upstart companies have a crack at trading as public companies, but without the expense that the more respected exchanges would incur for them. In this respect it's analogous to someone buying a car that they can afford. If you're just starting out and don't have rich parents that give you such things, then buying an older used, not so great looking car is the only sensible choice to make. It's nonetheless a huge step up from having no vehicle at all. And just as both good and shady people drive old beat up cars, the same is true with companies who choose to start off on the OTC pink sheets.
I think it's worth noting, for instance, that the Motley Fools Global Gain service which, as you may know, concentrates on finding good, non-US stocks to invest in, often singles out what they regard as good pink sheet stocks for one to consider adding to one's portfolio. For example, they've suggested for those members who are interested, to look at companies like: PMLIF.PK, IULTY.PK, BANAF.PK, HLFDY.PK etc. In short, being a pink sheet stock does not automatically mean that its a bad, untrustworthy company. And although the regulations are much looser, that doesn't mean that companies can't exceed the minimum requirements imposed on them by the OTC Pink regulations.
Of course in SIAF's case, they are conscientiously taking all the mandatory steps they need to to get off the pink sheet exchange and onto a more expensive, more respected and more regulated exchange. Yet it entails a slow process of gathering requisite information and satisfactorily proving to the SEC that they comply with the higher standards of the more expensive exchanges. They are, moreover, wanting to do this, among other reasons, because of the very point you brought up: there is an understandably negative stigma associated with pink sheet stocks because it's not necessary for them to report reliable information to the public. Some do but I presume the majority do not. So the question here is, is SIAF one of those pink sheet companies that falls in the former category. I happen to believe it is. But, clearly, to believe something doesn't in itself make it true.
Anyway, hopefully this layman's explanation brings a bit more clarity to your concerns.
Good luck to you and to all of us. I am, by the way, sorry if my previous post to you a while back was off putting--I would have loved to have been able to edit out a few things I had said where my ego had gotten the upper hand. I think it's healthy for these boards to have people who are genuinely interested in a company but nonetheless sincerely skeptical about it to voice their concerns. This can help everyone think things through more carefully. But I do think taking a skeptical stance toward a company needs to be accompanied with sincerity of purpose and interest. If not, it quickly deteriorates into bashing which often amounts to an abandonment of earnest questioning and merely an espousing of one's already arrived at negative conclusions about a company.
Steve
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
