Replies to post #55300 on DD Support Board and Research Team

[samsamsamiam]

Do you give that a possibility???

NOPE - especially since it is being PUMPED the way it is.
Plus that Ken Owen/Murray Goldenberg/Guy Griffithe connection and their past history tells me otherwise.

But hey - that's just old skeptical me talkin'! Pay me no mind and go slap dat ask!

BTW - a suspension could put them on the grey market as well. ;)

[1manband]

Is it feasible, not saying its factual, just feasible that they did so in order to cut costs on filings, avoid being put on the greys, until they have fully audited numbers?

Absolutely not. No chance. Companies go dark for a reason, and it isn't to save money, especially since most of these newly dark companies spend 10-100X the cost of SEC filings in stock promotion costs.

The SEC registration process is rigorous for a reason. No company would ever deregister just to attempt to re-register later. It is substantially cheaper, quicker and easier to catch up on all the late filings than deregister and then try to reregister later. The SEC knows why companies go dark and that is not a legitimate reason. Of all the Form 15 filers in the last decade, I can count on one hand (using only 1 or 2 fingers) of those that actually successfully reregistered their shares. The SEC redoubles or triples it reviews of Form 15 filers, especially concerning the period when they were dark, which is why even the tiny handful of Form 15 filers that actually try later to reregister ultimately fail.

[janice shell]

Is it feasible, not saying its factual, just feasible that they did so in order to cut costs on filings, avoid being put on the greys, until they have fully audited numbers?

Of course that's one possible explanation. But the fact that they were in that situation does't really instill confidence, does it?