Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Diplomat Direct (DIPL) - Internet - $100 mil/yr proj. sale -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: blankmind who wrote (65)	1/16/1999 1:06:00 AM
From: Andrew Martin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 183

blank. You gotta calm down dude. And please don't accuse me of being irresponsible. Here is a listing of DIPL's SEC filings: freeedgar.com As you can see the NT10K was filed 12/31. As far as your belief in my making an assertion of "delisting" I believe you jumped to a conclusion. It has been my experience a company has at least 45 days from the time of an NT filing before the SEC will effect a trading halt and/or a delisting. The "90 days" from the date of it's fiscal year end (30 Sept. '98) is the period which the company had to either file the 10K or an extension. At a minimum the company has 45 days and up to 90 days to file their 10K after the NT10K is filed before they have to practically worry about a halt/delisting. The issue is not topical until mid-February. It is typical of companies to file the NT on the last filing day allowable however in DIPL's case the insider selling the next day is what I find objectionable. It places the accounting of the sales into into their 2Q '99. As far as the reason for the delay I suppose the "changes in... accounting staff" could be referring to Mr. Irwin Oringer, CAO/Contr. as opposed to their auditor but either way we're talking about the availability of accountants. 90 days (30 Sept.-31 Dec.) is plenty of time to find a replacement and/or hire additional help. I cannot forsee a CAO leaving without giving notice or waiting for a replacement so I am therefore suspect of their excuse. I think it is far more reasonable that as a small company which has grown substantially their CAO may actually have needed extra help but their filing describes the situation as "changes" in accounting staff. In my book this is suspect. Regards, -Andrew.