OTOW's PR says, "DTC's removal of the limited chil

OTOW's PR says, "DTC's removal of the limited chill status"

Good for them -1 stock below 1c out of hundreds put on dtc ineligible since Mar 2011 and over 2000 restricted by brokers like zecco--I never heard of a limited chill status- as OTOW calls it-before -our expert on that issue -tlc2 -kept saying chill isnt right word-dtc ineligible stocks are not chilled-which would be an illiquid or untradeable stock -stock is trade for trade -meaning trades are manually processed

I know you are desperate for cwrn to move up but have you heard of the exception to the rule? Without a rule an exception could not exist right?

DTCC is owned by the brokers-sunnys cite.

I talked to ca a dozen brokers on the issue. The 2 things they consistently raised as necessary in their opinion to remove the trade for trade was current financials and a pps above 1c.
All these groups greenlighted by regulatory are targeting companies below 1 cent-that doesnt mean there wont be exceptions.

Go back and look at the many hours of dd on this subject-only one OTCBB stock that we could collectively find was put on dtc ineligible and it wasnt for lack of financials-that stock was below 1 cent. so those are the 2 things on brokers wishlist to remove dtc ineligible and since a co needs a broker sponsor to do that, what brokers are saying on the issue is very relevant.

Now the brokers could all be lying but since dtcc is reportedly owned by the brokers and dtcc wont give out info to even various dtc ineligible companies lawyers (not talking about crwn to my knowledge) I did the next best thing-which was talk to the brokers. You are perfectly free to spend thousands of hours of research yourself-since I've never been paid a red cent for it and am falsely accused by bashers as being a paid promoter.

We dont know details in their case -it would be great if CRWN could get off dtc ineligible without raising pps to 1 cent-I was just honestly reporting my diligent research on the issue as did tlc2.

Maybe they threatened to sue dtc-not likely given otow's balance sheet. There are a lot of cottage industry, as in fly by night, companies that offer to get companies dtc eligible for a fee of ca 25k or so.  Bob spent a lot of time  and so did I on this issue when it came out and there werent any easy solutions. The same things delaying uplisting as abundantly reported would likely be delaying removal of dtc ineligible status.

Look at postings prior to dec 31 2011-looked like were getting ready to post financials- see marionthis -an auditor of 25 years- opinion ca dec 21 2011 and tlc2's reporting of audit done by thanksgiving etc-then Bao suddenly reportedly (reported by others including you -not by me) paid for 60k tons of ore before shipped-before some of it-the 25k ton order- even trucked.

NDA's are SOP in Bao/CWRN burgeoning relationship situation w Bao wishing to hide Baja from competitors scouring every rock for new sources-so I would be very surprised if Bao didnt obtain an NDA as a quid pro quo.
Then as soon as that was out of the bag as per Apr 13 and 6-25-12 PR's sec situation arose-and had been sitting there for sometime unbeknownst to us- so we are waiting settlement of that so they can uplist to OTCBB and thus be SEC reporting which will-w some coordination perhaps- take care of the dtc ineligible status also.