Lately Roger has been writing up the PR's and having them screened thru the lawyers.
Resulting in statements like: "In addition, Digitcom makes no assurance that it will be able to meet the financial and other requirements established by NASDAQ for listing on the NASDAQ market system."
Now, this is obviously a true statement, but does it seem superfluous to anyone? I don't recall Digitcom claiming that they either meet or do not meet these requirements -- in fact, we know that they don't currently meet the minimum $4 bid. I thought the idea of filing an SB10 was to become fully reporting, which is the first thing that has to happen for NAZ, but far from the last. There are many BB companies that are fully reporting, but not NAZ, and that is all I was looking for at this time. As I have said, I doubt if DGIV or any other high tech company will ever go NAZ without a buyout.
So why would DGIV's counsel add a statement like that? I guess the lawyers are now in charge of this company, maybe "charge" in more ways than one, I don't know.
I am half expecting the next news release to be a clarification from the lawyers saying that Digitcom is going the the trade show in New York, but they can make no assurances that the plane will not crash on its way there, or that the trade show will actually happen, since the conference center might have its lights go out. I mean, let's cover all bases...
|
