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.
A public company , DBMM, who has only increased OS 5% in 7 seven years is praised because that is a remarkably small increase, particularly on the OTC. Shareholders know and shareholders agree.
No Convertible Debt since 2015 and LTIs provide cash flow support through acquisition(s) and growth. They are in it to win it as portfolio investors, not traders. They have NASDAQ objective.
The Company knows exactly what it is doing.
More nonsense—the last Update is clear. The Management is in close contact with the regulators and the result is the Company has prevailed each and every time.
The Management has excellent relationships with the regulators built with evidence and positive results step-by-step. See the link below for the last Update that has indicated the Company's way forward also is in public forum.
The Company deals with facts and evidence.
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholder-update-march-27-2023/
Shareholders know that the “alleged” nonsense is nonsense.
As described in the last Update of March 13th the Company has a process which is documented , shared and follows.
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholder-update-march-13-2023/
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholder-update-march-27-2023/
Portfolio shareholders like myself are subject matter experts in 10-Ks and 10-Q’s which are issued under the instructions provided by the SEC.
Clarification since those comments are again false inference. The reports are not intended to be ‘Breaking News,’ rather an established framework.
The Financial Statements and the MD&A are building blocks. Wrong again for the zillionth time regarding material provided to regulators.Always never, yet results happen, despite protestations.
DBMM will prevail on a step-by-step basis as it has since LTIs supported cure and growth next. They remain for a reason and no amount of nonsense, over and over, will change what they like about DBMM.
Shareholders know.
Issuing timely 10-Ks and 10-Q’s and Updates to the website is a bullseye!
Kramer network always hiding in plain side. Actual, not false , conspiracy.
The pattern of behavior to periodically change venues to avoid accountability .simply grows the RICO Kramer network of companies to elude securities reach and start all over again.
Asher was followed by Power Up Lending which was followed by Sixth Steet Lending . They’re 8-9 Kramer companies which comprise a network. Keep a lookout for the next company in process.
Many of the more recent lawsuits list all Kramer controlled companies like Redstart Holdings and Vis Vires Group, Geneva Roth, KLM, etc.
Happy Easter or Passover to all shareholders.
FYI— the Company already has had the pps above $0.01, so shareholders know there are several stages of criteria to meet.
IMO- DBMM continues to work closely with OTC Markets and discuss instructions for way forward, one step at a time. That is how the nine (9) wins took place, and will continue for #10 and #11.
Shareholders know.
Opinions are not facts. I move on when a company is not meeting my expectations. Simple as that.
Meanwhile DBMM will work on win #10 and win #11
Administrative Order from Hope Capital case generating the Consent Decree and prohibition from taking shares .
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10239-s.pdf
$DBMM
Shareholders know because there are all facts documented in Filings, Court Papers and Updates and I have posted a zillion times. I have been providing this info over and over with Facts never changing as they are documented available to all.
My post was to refute the false statements made on the same subject refuted before.
Facts:
-Asher suit in Legal Proceedings in every 10-K through final settlement of $65K on June 18,2018. Original litigation of $335K , default thrown out, judgment $123k w/interest only through July 2015.
- Turnover Motion signed by CK in Asher litigation docs on Oct 26 2016
-Hope Capital case with Consent Decree that Curt Kramer signed with the SEC which states in “Undertakings” that they are not allowed to take shares in public companies or its subsidiaries. Signed October 27, 2016.
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10239.pdf
-The hubris is signing a Consent Decree with the SEC within days of a Turnover Motion in a Civil Court without disclosure thinking DBMM would not find out is beyond arrogance.
All available to people who take the time to understand each of the mitigating circumstances for which DBMM had evidence and resulted in a Dismissal.
Raising the same conflations as if the dates and facts changed. DBMM prevailed . The data all there.
Categorically wrong again.
Shareholders know how many times misleading and false statements were and are made on matters that are documented otherwise and are in the Court Records .
FACTS:
1. DBMM crafted the Settlement Asher and Curt Kramer for 40% less than debt with interest .
2. The Hope Capital case precluded them from seeking shares in a public company or its subsidiaries, so the turnover motion was fraudulent. They violated a Consent Decree with the SEC not disclosed to the Civil Court Judge which compounds the fraud. Federal Court would have been next stop — so they settled .
3. Continuous conflation with false information
shareholders know.
Shareholders know the pps depressors make every effort to force close under $0.05 which rounds on Yahoo Finance and others to $0.01. When under $0.05 it rounds to $0.00
The Mickey Mouse tactics ad nauseum are obvious. Shareholders know.
Every single win has had a flurry of the same “Nevers” as never filed, never done, never will—it goes on and on.
The Company refused the bullying and stated patience. Also never provided details as that is inappropriate in the circumstances. No applications are ever public as they contain privileged information.
DBMM busy working on Win #10 and #11.
Excellent . read the regs. The Company has among others.
Obvious. Intent and pattern of behavior key.
$DBMM
Wrong, wrong, wrong
AT said she wouldn’t talk to him. No hiding. She just would not speak to him . She follows FD guides and since every filing from 10-K to 10-Q to 8-K is signed by her as the CEO.
I’ll bet she had lots of discussions with LTIs and the regulators to ensure success 9 times and working on #10 and #11.
Revocation was a myth because remand is like an eraser. It is like invisible ink.
Means nothing. SCOTUS stated cannot be cited.
Yet the 9 wins happened and #10 and #11 on their way.
$DBMM
Weaponization of the SEC? The House questions the SEC Chair
SEC seeking an increase of 12% in funding.
https://cooleypubco.com/2023/04/03/house-questions-sec-chair/#more-25792
$DBMM
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Opinions are not facts. The same criteria for any order. A revocation would have had the same 30-day period for material errors or reviews .
The order was Late-Nov 2017, repeat for the zillionth time in evidence , funding by LTIs for the cure came in October, 2017. Confidential, documented, audited and acknowledged.
The Company would have stated for the zillionth time all the material errors in the order which became the mitigating circumstances.
There is no automatic approval ever. Read up on due process and judicial procedure .
Remand sets aside all previous orders so DBMM went forward producing evidence which got it a Dismissal thereafter.
DBMM has been working with OTCM since the 15c2-11 Amendments were executed in 2021. Immediately upon removal of the CE the Company was working with OTCM to Uplist.
Remember every approval thus far happened irrespective of all the opinions .
Patience has been required every step of the way.
"And gone forever..” Shareholders know that LTI’s came in to cure in October, 2017 so DBMM would not ever accept a revocation as there were mitigating circumstances. They would have cited material errors in order as there were when LTI’s began to cure with Financial Evidence under Confidential Cover.
No other Company prevailed, despite the remand.
DBMM prevailed and working on win #10 and win # 11 , on and on.
Shareholders know that the Company makes announcements when there's results or done deals, and the pps will explode. Nothing can stop the trajectory. Happened before, will happen again.
Stay tuned.
Shareholders know very dead issue.
DBMM set the record straight. Conspiracy theories are not for shareholders.
Furthermore, a video promoter is not a registered broker or certified financial advisor and cannot benefit from a financial arrangement. Particularly not with a public company. Certainly not with DBMM.
IMO It was BS and DBMM would never include Avid in any serious financial matter.I do not believe it. Immature prattling.
Speculation over non-factual, undocumented situations is dangerous
What value is saying without Lucia None.
Who cares? DBMM followed the remand, provided evidence ,cured and got a Dismissal from the longest tenured ALJ.
Every other of the 100+ companies remanded could have done the same if they had evidence , but did not. DBMM did and prevailed.
FACT: When reaudit occurred, everything was set with an acquisition concluded in 2012, and growth infusion capital underway following 10-K filing, Nov, 2013. That was same month as reaudit. No pooch involved. The exact opposite.
Read my other response all facts that are acknowledged legal documentation.
IMO as a portfolio investor and someone who chose to dig deep into this anomalous situation called DBMM and its case of mitigating circumstances and DOE overreach beginning with the SEC reaudit, every fact is documented. That situation has been acknowledged by brokerage and regulatory groups following a Dismissal by an ALJ as highly unusual thus warranting a Dismissal. No ALJ has ever had a Dismissal PFR’ed. A stunning overreach.
Suggest to let it play out without The situation has always been an anomaly, and will ultimately be closed as such, IMO.
Shareholders know that conflation over and over is misleading.
All documentation in Court Filings called mitigating circumstances all acknowledged by Dismissal of Nov 12, 2019.
1. 2013- Reaudit 2013
2. 2014- Litigation from Asher
3. May, 2017 OIP for 2 yrs late, Court later agreed to adding 3rd year to Super 10-K so immediately up to date with cure
The mitigating circumstances began with reaudit , the genesis of ultimate late filings.
Most shareholders would not agree with the sanctimonious statements re DBMM.
Had there never been a reaudit mandate from SEC 2 weeks before a 10-K rendering company non-compliant through no fault of DBMM, there would have been no mitigating circumstances.
Due diligence is required before casting aspersions
Nonsense!
Shareholders do due diligence and know the Company had late filings as it is public information and predicates the entrance of the LTIs.
Support for the Company has been there since then for the acquisition and the future, and the absurdity of the reaudit and what followed , none of which was DBMM’s doing.
Hardly misleading Happy Saturday
Shareholders know.
False information again. Filings are audited and clear, Updates explain DC business model. The external issues had to be eliminated before any growth business model could be actualized as explained a zillion times.
Settlements removing aged onerous debt, interest, derivative liabilities all to the Company’s benefit continue one by one since 2018 following the Super 10-K.
Cashflow debt from LTIs who are in it to win it. Very much support since cure and will grow the Company with an exponent both organically and by acquisition.
DC’s revenues are improving post-pandemic to get back to the $450K-$550K norm after dealing with clearing up external mitigating circumstances step by step and receiving a Dismissal Nov 12, 2019.
The digital model is working step-by-step. The Company knows exactly what it is doing. New clients in pipeline. The digital world is not old manufacturing model. Valuations set excluding revenues and debt.
Stick with filings, will be clear quarter by quarter .
Context is Super 10-k , before and forward. Shareholders know the Company had late filings for all the mitigating circumstances stated as nauseum.
Even in that scenario never was there ever an issue on any Financial Statements.
Never
Shareholders know that DBMM is a fully reporting Company and has always reported properly and the SEC and other regulators have never had an issue. Ever.
It is wrong to list nonsense when in context information is provided, as required in the 10-K and 10-Q filings exactly following SEC instructions.
Again shareholders are not be mislead
Shareholders know.
Conflating unrelated matters.
The Company petitioned to keep financial information evidence it wanted to present in Feb 2018 because of the Lucia remand, private. This was formal, legal request and had nothing to do with any DOE submissions.
The Court under Release 5543 granted the Petition and the Confidential material provided as Evidence under Confidential Cover documenting the costs of the Reaudit as mitigating circumstances evidence totaling $157,300.
The DOE did not include a reply and hid it from the public. That is sanctionable.
Shareholders are not be be mislead
False statement. Still not in OIP file. DOE arrogance of overreach and waste of public money and hiding required public posting.
The OIP is required to be complete and available to the public coincident with filing.
DOE cannot file a “reply” without including it in the OIP litigation file. It is required public information and it was not made available which could mean the Commission has not included it for some reason.
Certainly indicative of more sloppy work from DOE .
Great find Pink!
Nonsense. One size does not fit all.
Call a government agency and you get the lowest level staffer in the call center. Contact executives are established as needed.
It is arrogance to equate a Senior level contact to a frat house
Most opinions are dangerous as poster has no way of knowing and often wrong. Particularly confusing for new shareholders.
Opinions by definition are non-public, otherwise they are facts , documented or at least common sense.
And the CE will never be removed, quoting “public policy concerns”from website.
IMO according to DBMM results, DBMM does not use websites and Google to claim to be experts. Experience and relationships are far more effective as DBMM is totally responsive, strategic and factual with examples and situation. Acknowledged by ALJ Foelak and all touchstones.
Twas ever thus, ask shareholders
DBMM has documented taking instructions directly from OTCM since identifying a Sponsoring Broker through to removal of the CE and all discussions around the narratives. Not getting packet(s) of information.
DBMM builds a foundation of relationships. They do not work with call centers and Google searches.
Comments/opinions should have a disclaimer when making statements quite stridently that posters have no way of knowing .
The Company met the initial criteria to begin the process. Key word initiate.
DBMM has been taking instructions from OTCM as they have since Amendments to 15c2-11 on Sept 28,2021 starting with identify broker sponsor for FINRA application, through OTCM CE removal, to Uplist.
BS is continuous opinions with no facts or documentation
Read the Updates, step by step progress and wins.
This is the same nonsense for all the initiatives and applications. Didn’t work then and it doesn’t work now.
The Company returns to over $0.01 and all of a sudden the Uplist. Time to get real. Applications can be in neutral, they do not expire nor are they canceled.
FYI—Company has said many times there is no paid awareness. It has always been a required disclosure by those paid as was the case many years ago , clear in any due diligence, probably 10+ years ago and none since.
Shareholders know
The manipulation is rampant
But everyone should remember that the Company has plans with the LTIs and it is a long play and it will have sustainability.
Patience is required and DBMM will deliver as it has the past 9 times—despite the same “never” slapping over and over.
Pps will chase upward . News is coming step-by-step.
The PFR is overreach in the extreme.
A Dismissal from an ALJ has Never had a PFR motion by DOE simply because they could.
What complete nonsense and waste of resources 3+ years later. The Washington Post could make this an interesting commentary how the SEC tries to eliminate due process and want all Companies to be steamrolled to make their funding numbers.
Shareholders know