This list of 35, in the 2007 bulk suspension, was posted by you over a month ago for your support that bulk suspensions are not uncommon. I re-posted it for Cyber who said "name 2 that went from grey back to pink (after a suspension)." The allegation, repeatedly, is that sec suspensions put stocks on the grey sheets which do not return to pinks. It may be rare, but the statement alleging impossibility is grossly incorrect. He asked "the board" for 2 examples. I am giving him an easy lead to 4. This was ONE bulk suspension event THAT RESULTED IN 4 RETURNING TO PINKS. As far as "what happened to the other 31 & how long did it take" & Cyber's question "any more recent than 2007" ... I ALREADY ANSWERED THE QUESTION ASKED. 2 was supposedly far fetched & no one would be able to name 2. There are 4 right there in that one suspension list.
With all respect to you & all that have addressed my post, all I will say is DYODD! Took me over an hour to research the list of 35. Take the time to do it, your turn. The 4 are there, you will find them. I disagree that it is "appropriate" for me to share my dd, just out of principle. It's my prerogative & am choosing to prove my point being: Everyone should do some homework before making a false deductions. If you choose not to take the time to research the very list that you posted, that does not dismiss the fact that there are 4 there that submitted form 211's & returned trading on pink. PS - that list of 35 had substantially higher degrees of individual suspension severity when compared to a simple "adequacy & accuracy of public information." This 35-list proves another misconstrued point: the sec gives clear reasoning for each suspension, very clear. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/suspensions/2007/34-55420-o.pdf
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
