Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
The regulators only go back 7 years at SEC and 6 years at FINRA, but why go back 10 years or more? In what universe is that relevant?
No CDs issued since 2015
No CDs executed since 2016
No conversion now or in future. Fixed shares controlled by negotiation. Discount to Company every time. Benefit to Company and Shareholders.
It is absurd to suggest that public companies don’t have debt. The digital model is not manufacturing of decades ago . Knowledge of industry is key and LTIs and long shareholders get it. Each quarter will be significantly better .
Shareholders are aware the OS is being carefully stewarded by management . Shareholders know. Relationships are everything.
Read the 10-Q 2Q specifics following the last sentence in the extract provided. Spoon feeding is exhausting.
Extract states “ fixed number of shares, no CD terms, CDs canceled”
Then specific cases cited. Company benefit , significantly discounted settlements.
All in last filing. Read the full filing. Shareholders know.
Everyday shareholders hear the same nonsense.
The LTIs see the future since they jumped aboard to cure, to bring sponsor broker on board for Form 211 application to FINRA , to removal of CE to Final Order of Dismissal to growth.
Shareholders know increases in revenues, pps, market cap and digital valuation will make for a very robust investment . Relationships are everything and the Company knows exactly what to do to effect win #11 and #12, but that is only the beginning. In it to win it.
$DBMM
Deflection doesn’t work, look over here, no look over there.
Ask a question, then say didn’t ask?
Due diligence comes from sources like litigation Court Papers and filings.
“Don’t care?”
Wrong re CDs—yet again, Read the Q. The Financial Overview/Outlook called the MD&A , pgs. 26-27 of April 15th 10-Q.
“….Additionally, we have demonstrated our adherence to such a philosophy by renegotiating its aged debt with lenders, one at a time, at fixed settlement amounts with no conversion terms. Furthermore, such renegotiations lead to the derecognition of derivative liabilities overhanging our balance sheet. The Company intends to continue its debt negotiation and modification program. This has been a successful strategy thus far.”
There have been no executed CD terms since 2016. Word salad comment is projection. Total misinformation. Shareholders know.
Astonishing to shareholders that documented Court Papers are ignored. The Kramers follow their usual pattern of behavior with the 667 companies they financed.
The 2 brothers act as a team,
One makes Initial contact outreach to Company the other is financial / trading person. Both Kramers always involved.
So obvious, just read
Really important to understand the SEC and PCAOB regulations and instructions underlying the 10-Q and 10-K filings.
Certain items like "NET LOSS" is irrelevant as is paper loss and can vary significantly depending on the volatility of pps and derivative liabilities.
The Update of April 13th had a whole section on Reduction in Aged Debt and Derivative Liabilities which, once CDs are removed will be $-0- for DL. See below
Is misleading to infer that data which fluctuates dramatically quarter to quarter is strategically relevant for shareholders.
Shareholders know. that is why there is comparisons in the filings.
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholder-update-april-13-2023/
When reviewing the aforementioned 2Q2023 10-Q filing, with emphasis on the MD&A, a few highlights and comments:
Revenues– Improvement of 74% over same period 2022, and 27% for 6-month period.– The Company sees a positive, demonstrated business outlook which will increase revenues based on the step-by-step approach implemented and shared in earlier Updates.
Reduction in Aged Debt– Following strategy of removing one lender holding aged Convertible Debentures at a time via settlement, certain CDs have been canceled, along with interest and derivative liabilities, which have been removed in all relative portions of the Financial Statements. This quarter, 7.5 million shares were issued to remove the aged debt and the Lender permanently.– Because the 2Q2023 had highly volatile pps, it is important to explain aspects of DL which are really in the weeds and were intended to illustrate a worst-case scenario for Convertible Debentures conversion, exacerbated by volatility in pps
Derivative Liabilities– In filing, read sections entitled “Derivative Liabilities,” “Fair Value of Financial Instruments” and “Convertible Instruments” (pgs 9-10). The reporting guidelines were established by the SEC in 1997, and were made more rigorous after the Enron debacle. DLs are required inclusions in 10-Ks and 10-Qs irrespective of whether they apply, as is the case with DBMM as a fully reporting company.– DBMM is settling each aged Convertible Debenture to the benefit of the Company, so the terms of the CDs are irrelevant and canceled. Yet, the pps volatility still must be calculated and carried as a liability, which generates a paper loss until the liability is canceled.– Ultimately, as CDs are settled and canceled, DBMM will have no DLs and the liability will be 0, instead of wildly fluctuating every quarter and negatively impacting the balance sheet, and generating a net loss which is nothing more than a paper loss which never materializes.– DLs have been confusing in the past, so particularly in the 2Q when the pps had significant volatility, we wanted to define the requirement and explain why DBMM is an anomaly. The Company looks forward to all aged debt being extinguished as a priority, as it has since 2020. DBMM management has found this situation very frustrating and worthy of explanation.
Everybody listen up: filing due in a week or so. Front page of file will have OS day of filing .
Will show the 30 million shares. Restricted share count carried on iHub will remain the same as after the issuance. Shares are restricted.
Each settlement deal is unique. That can include a holding period.
Settlements have no conversion aspect. None , the CD terms are canceled. Fixed share settlements.No discounts no conversion to lender. The settlements are all to the benefit of the company and has multiple areas of benefit, included canceling derivative liabilities associated .
Try reading the MD&A. It so states , every word.
No reverse splits shareholders know oh and nothing will shake and scare shareholders remember that
Shareholders know.
Totally agree Fai!
Current shareholders know that they project their own documented ‘obviousness’ 24/7/365.
Not you, not me. Shareholders know
$DBMM
False information again to excuse manipulation.
There is no dilution as recent issuance was restricted shares.
No such word as “guilty” in a dismissal nor in AP. Revisionist history not available.
Operative word is DISMISSAL, beating all odds.
DBMM Rocks and future is growth and up, up, up. Every quarter better.
Ten years ago? The world has changed dramatically.
No way is the Company going to project as plans will evolve from all the dynamics in plan, and will only announce results or actual specifics which are definitive.
No interest in more chaos to create false narrative.
All will happen with support in place step by step. #11 and #12 on the runway.
Absolute BS! Learning to read an audited balance sheet is essential.
Firstly, the Company does not have $6million in debt. Not by a long shot. Less than half that amount and certainly not settlement eligible.
The loan debt from LTIs is cashflow financing with payback out of future revenues . It represents $1.8million .
Settlements are aged debt and watch growth coming in pps, market cap, valuation and revenues quarter on quarter.
False statements are always exposed. Shareholders will not be misled understood
Shareholders know.
Everyone knows that DBMM has no paid awareness by the Company.
Really? How about reading the filings.
The MD&A of every filing since 202O speaks of elimination of aged debt strategy following the statement:
“The Company resolved in 2015 to eliminate any consideration of using convertible debentures as a financing vehicle. Accordingly , the Company has not issued convertible debentures since 2015.
Additionally, we have demonstrated our adherence to such a philosophy by renegotiating its aged debt with lenders, one at a time, at fixed settlement amounts with no conversion terms. Furthermore, such renegotiations lead to the derecognition of derivative liabilities overhanging our balance sheet. The Company intends to continue its debt renegotiation and modification program. This has been a successful strategy thus far. …”
Then each settlement is described and unique.
The “NEVER” is not accurate.
The last PR in June spoke to the growth strategy as well .
Any Settlements are Aged Debt being removed to the benefit of the Company.
The Management is intact :)
Company knows exactly what it is doing in the best interests of shareholders. Filings will include the strategy as it has in the past. Like 16 months ago!
Revisionist history is irrelevant because not facts. Rather intended to inflame. Speaking of word salad
Pejorative language word salad? Try reading facts.
Show link where Company said 6months to clear the Match 2022 settlement. Action 16 months ago with each settlement unique.
Company knows exactly what it is doing.
This has been answered with facts many times.
Nothing will scare shareholders into selling their shares
For the zillionth time, each settlement is unique and negotiated. Aged debt , if settling CDs, have met Rule 144 criteria many years so the minimum is long achieved. A legal opinion is required for ever settlement , then subject to audit approval.2022 settlement was not dumping shares. Pejorative language is inflammatory—unnecessarily. Was before CE dropped or Final Order of Dismissal.
DBMM is not your usual template. Everything being done in best interests of shareholders.
No omissions which give false inference . One size does not fit all.
Legally Lucia caused remand had everything to do with the outcome of the DBMM AP. The name of the Company is in a SCOTUS order.
Repeat: DBMM is contained in the companies listing of the remand order. A legal document.
Likewise, DBMM did not appeal anything. A remand vacated the order and SCOTUS ordered no citation of the remanded order. That is very different from an appeal. A remand vacated the earlier order and started all over. That was crucial to DBMM.Maranda Fritz capitalized on it as foundational.
Your opinion is not what the Court Papers stated. I prefer documentation and facts not opinions. This is why I always suggest shareholders do their own due diligence.
Your question-“when has DBMM … been addressed by SCOTUS” is very important as the foundation of DBMM’s ultimate Dismissal of the AP by SEC ALJ Carol Fox-Foelak
SCOTUS Case — Lucia Vs: SEC remanded well over 100 cases with APs in front of the SEC:
All orders for those cases were remanded and companies allowed to submit new evidence ordered in December, 2017. Those companies were listed and included in thr SCOTUS Remand Order and DBMM was one of those companies.
DBMM immediately offered new evidence of mitigating circumstances for their delayed filings . The Company requested Confidential Cover for the cost of the earlier Reaudit and new longterm investors supporting DBMM cure to growth. The Judge granted under Order Release 5543.
The remand was the foundation of DBMM’s ultimate Dismissal.
Very important in the history of DBMM .
Please don't ignore crucial events
The fact of OTCM increased authority is the significant fact. It changed the landscape for the OTC. IMO it is only the beginning with more to follow. Look at OTCM’s recent acquisitions , like the EDGAR system for SEC reporting.
A delegated authority by a regulator is as significant as from the regulator itself. OTCM has that authority for OTC companies.
The authority is relevant and OTCM never had that authority before Sept 28 2021 , but it does now.
No one trades without OTCM saying grace.
Perfect example to be used for false statements.
1. Citing a remanded vacated order SCOTUS ordered should never be cited as has no legal standing after being vacated.
2. No “guilty” no “sentence” as those words do not exist in a Dismissal.
3. No “sentence” challenged as did not exist.
4. Dismissal is Final Order Dismissal
Shareholders know as do others.
Answered a zillion times that all public company auditors have SEC/PCAOB instructions on verification of all facts included in 1O-K. Statement so states in 10-K.
An audit of a public company is prescribed and include in 10-k: “We believe that all our directors are qualified to serve on our board of directors based on their experience and the diversity of background.”
Such unequivocal BS. The inference that a restrictive share issuance equals block sales is not only nonsense, it is impossible.
Restricted shares are legended and cannot be sold/traded.
Shareholders know.
The long relationship is a Never.
Instead I know the longs and we are very strong together. We all know every event carries a chicken little story. Then the Company puts it in context and results fall into place.
Scare attempts never work. Shareholders know.
“Naked Shorts don’t exist without FTD’s”
Longs are NOT worried! It is false to say they are worried as definitely are not. DBMM will deliver next wins as promised.
Nothing does or will scare shareholders
$DBMM
This is not accurate. Current info is the authority of OTCM , and is required in all situations as the first step and a requirement.
Lack of Current info gets you kicked off platform, but cannot get a sponsoring broker to apply to FINRA via a Form 211, without becoming current in filings first.
OTCM controls trading. Each issuer must be current in filings in order to trade. Once removed, the process to be reinstated requires becoming current and compliant first , then finding a sponsoring broker to file Form 211, meet their due diligence requirements, then FINRA review which may or may not approve a market maker.
Exactly, you described exactly what I said and that is delegated authority. The authority delegated by the regulator SEC to OTCM .
Welcome to hierarchies and accountability. OTCM has far more authority than ever before to remove companies . Trading cannot take place unless OTCM clears. They are determining who can trade by certain established criteria. 2,000
Companies didn’t make the cut, did they?
Shareholders know.
The Company never has used the terminology of “portfolio traders.” Nor have I or any shareholders I know.
Ask the person who used it as is one false statement
The 10-K annually meets all reporting criteria and audited accordingly.
For the zillionth time: Cashflow financing are Demand Loans. All stated in 10-Ks .LTIs are following digital industry model intending company growth in pps, market cap, and revenues will allow for long term horizon on repayment out of future earnings. These are sophisticated investors who are very knowledgeable in longterm investments. They are cash infusions , not equity based.
This has been corrected before another scare tactic.
It isn’t happening.
Read the Amendments to the 15c2-11 executed on Sept 28, 2021. The Regulator, SEC, delegated authority to OTC Markets for OTC trading. Key words :delegated authority.
OTC Markets removed 2,000+ companies, that never happened before by OTCM. Do you think the SEC gave them a list? Not hardly.
Facts
Wrong again. Even non-shareholders should know about reporting requirements for public companies and couple that with audit requirements. All facts stated in 10-K verified via Audit and documented annually.
Non-shareholders revisionist history.
Check Court Papers which have testimony by DBMM which stated during the Great Recession there was no money available through 2014 ripples. DBMM knew Asher was a hard lender but manageable as previous loans serviced with no problem. Acquisition finalized in 2012 and funding commited in hand coincident with first 10-k due Nov 30 ,2013. All documented
Instead reaudit mandate was Nov 15, 2013 through no fault of DBMM . Non-compliance and all mitigating circumstances followed.
All acknowledged by SEC ALJ in Dismissal.
Shareholders know.
OTC Markets were delegated authority for OTC trading and reporting under the amended 15c2-11 on September 28,2021. 2,000 companies thrown off platform. DBMM announced as Pink Current same day.
Watch for other clearing mechanisms to emerge as higher standards emerge via FINRA and OTCM. Retail shareholders getting a voice, one step at a time.
The leadership is OTCM and , in conjunction with FINRA , will continue to focus on getting rid of manipulation by non-shareholders to protect bad actors and short sellers. Depressing pps is one tactic, very obvious using false statements, especially when it continues after being corrected.
Shareholders know—as do others. Stay tuned.
Very obvious that almost 200 posts on a Federal holiday :)
Thanks for your comparison . It is why shareholders should do their own Due Diligence.
It is also clear Non-shareholders win if companies fail because the bad actors the short sellers need to depress the pps. No matter the positive event, they must depress. Surely very concerned about Uplist to OTCQB. It is going to happen, just like the first 10 wins.
Stay tuned DBMM win #11 and #12 on their way. No amount of false statements or attempts at deflection will change the growth and prospects now that all hurdles met and LTIs in place. Love where and how the Company is moving forward.
Shareholders are now able to refer to the non-facts by non-shareholders who ignore documented facts. Perfect evidence of false statements and fiction.
Shareholders know
The Company has not done any interview as stated in Update of March 27 .
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholder-update-march-27-2023/
Extracted from update
Most recently, DBMM was the focus of an internet screed touting a funding ostensibly rejected, described by a series of false statements about the Company, with pejorative comments supposedly made by Linda Perry, DBMM’s principal executive cited, with whom he acknowledged he had neither spoken nor corresponded. Ms. Perry remains curious how and why he was privy to any alleged funding discussion?
Furthermore the Company has gone on record that it has no way of knowing if NSS exist. If it was as simple as a short report, the SEC, DOJ, FINRA and regulators would not state that ferreting out NSS was a prime objective. Counterfeit, phantom and other false certificates are not in any short report.
The Company has no way of knowing and non-shareholders who have been wrong. Protecting "Nevers" not on
Shareholders are on to the games. It is all documented.
It is really important for blatantly false statements, chronologically totally impossible, to be corrected irrespective of the attempt to do revisionist history by conflation as the facts are documented with evidence in court papers and by regulators.
2012- Digital Clarity acquisition completed
2013-Mandatory reaudit of 3 years made DBMM SEC non-compliant and Asher CDs could not be converted under Rule 144
Feb 2014-Asher litigated to steal company as knew they could not convert
Sept 2014- 3 year audit completed, but now because of litigation they could not convert
Because of reaudit genesis mitigating circumstances continued with 2015 10-K delayed filings.
May 2018 Super 10-K filed to cure delayed filings.
To the Company’s benefit , they Settled at 50% of Asher principal, interest, derivative liabilities, etc in cash on June 28, 2018.
All facts; Asher tried to steal Company and DBMM prevailed despite Asher’s egregious dirty tricks. Asher hoisted on its own petard because it should not have sued during reaudit and then fraudulently breached its SEC Consent Decree. The Consent Decree was Oct 2016.
All in Court Papers and Filings.
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10239.pdf
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10239-s.pdf