RE:How Coincidental...Resumed Trading and their news release!!!Not to dissuade from your perspective but there is one other point to make. Before sharing that you are absolutely correct about the financials!!! No excuses blaming auditors/accountants with a year end in the middle of a calendar year and outside of their busy season.
As far as the reapplication. The original application must have been weak on details if they actually passed 4 of the 5 criterion. The fact that this category of application includes prosthetics and orthotics should not have resulted in a failure to meet the following:
In the final BCD we stated that Venowave did not fall into a durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics and supplies (DMEPOS) benefit category because it was a single patient use item. DME is defined in Medicare regulations at title 42 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 414.202 as equipment furnished by a supplier or a home health agency that meets five conditions, including that of being able to withstand repeated use.
If that really was the only holdback and failure to receive the necessary certification then this should be easily rectified. You can google Venowave and find several pieces of information that support satisfying this criterion. I actually sent Rob an email years ago from an Amazon review that was high on the utility of the product but was not great in terms of wear and tear. The original distributor of the product in the US prior to THRM acquiring cancelled the product for the same reason ...essentially straps that eventually failed and were hard to replace ....a problem eadily solved in my estimation.
The product was tested in Canada with excellent results ...this is purely a matter of quality control.
GLTE!!!