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.
They Acquired a private company with $1million in embedded proprietary value , then less than 2 years later the distractions began.
It is boring to say 20 years, as not accurate. That is also deflection.
Who cares, no one today who is a supportive shareholder.
Financial Disclosure is for the benefit of the shareholder and it is clearly described? in regulations.
It is ludicrous to think micromanaging is in the Company’s best interests. That is why the SEC’s preference is information is in the form of 10-Ks and in between audits, quarterly reviews. If material financial or organizational events occur, than an 8-K should be filed in EdGAR.
No Company would micromanage as suggested as it is not in the Company’s best interests. That would be a breach of privacy and in certain aspects potentially inside information.
Read the 211 amendment, either the traditional path followed in that information provided to sponsoring broker , who submits to FINRA or
The new option is for the Company to submit to OTC Markets, who submits to FINRA. OTC Markets has never been delegated that authority before, and has no experience or success data.
As DBMM stated, they followed the broker sponsorship option.
The 211 is not provided to OTC Markets at all by the broker, it is submitted to FINRA directly which has been the normal process.
A little knowledge is dangerous, especially as regulations have been amended and changed.
Nonsense, based on opinion
Semantics is all that can be quibbled about.
According to SEC Orders , an update on a Company’s website is equivalent to a press release as it is intended to inform publicly.
PRs are becoming more and more obsolete in the digital world. Newspapers are going digital , so welcome to 2022. Irrelevant to even discuss.
Semantics and then opinion. Let’s use facts.
From DBMM Update with specifics side by side:
Jan 26 Update-“…The Company is finalizing the labor intensive task of submitting the 15c2-11 backup material to the broker who will be sponsoring it through the FINRA application as required by the recent amendments to resume normal trading. The material will be released this week.”
March 22 Update-“… the labor intensive 15c2-11 with extensive back up material was submitted to the sponsoring broker in early February as indicated in our last Update.”
Information on submission took a few extra days and while the Company shared the specifics , the first estimate was “a lie?”
Stay tuned.
More misinformation based on no facts
As stated in Court Papers and documented in a confidential Court Order of January, 2018 which included new funding to replace the funding LOST because of reaudit and litigation.
The long-term shareholders are in place because the Company showed grit and tenacity in standing up for facts.
The laundry list of statements are just wrong and more misinformation. Court Papers and filings are documented information.
The Company’s will deliver as it has met every hurdle and kicked over almost every distraction and working on the last one. CE removal and let the games begin.
Yup, this dog can hunt as they say in Texas and it is doing just that
No the could not have avoided this as that is nonsense.
The long term investors brought in coincident with curing late filings, know full well what crap went down and supported the fact that the distractions never should have occurred.
To roll over and be revoked?? No way as that was not intent of regulations and no proper funders would sign on.
Sometimes standing up for what is right, is the way to go— not roll over and play dead.
Do you know that when companies are on NASDAQ or NYSE and have delayed filings, they are NOT suspended from trading? Only OTC companies. Ever wonder why SEC has essentially abrogated all responsibility to OTC Markets?
Stay tuned, it is not the 1960’s.
A link to investors strategy?
Now that is laughable.
Ignore the acquisition of Digital Clarity —really?
It’s embedded intrinsic valuation was over $1million for intellectual property.
Glad the Company’s long term investors see that value as tip of iceberg without and multiples used in digital landscape for potential revenues, growth , acquisitions.
So buyers in the the largest trading market in the world , have access as they will buy and the valuation of the Company will be adjusted upward.
It will accelerate growth and acquisition target closure.
The Company’s long-term investors have verbalized an accelerated growth pattern .
Stay tuned
Isn’t iHub a forum for shareholders?
All discussions between the Company, the SEC ,and therefore, documented is under confidential cover or have been agreed and stated in filings.
The information required under a 211 is not for public information , much like certain matters in the 10-k for privacy reasons. Otherwise there could be pernicious use as there has been before.
DBMM is protecting shareholders as Judge Foelak included in her dismissal decision.
Both Corp Finance and the Chief Justice agreed that when audited financials are provided and there are no material events during preceding Q’s , Q’s are “of little value to shareholders.” That was advice given to DBMM in advance of Super 10-K preparation.
As far as ICEDR language, it was amended to and filed as a 10-k amendment and provided to Corp Fin. Corp Fin than provided a letter which was filed in EdGAR . The matter was satisfied.
The PFR was from Enforcement language and they cannot ignore Corp Fin approval.
Very sloppy work which has caused unacceptable delays.
For the zillionth time, there were no conversions of the two loans cited, as nauseum. The first RS was well before the reaudit and had nothing to do this discussion.
Future: there have been no convertible debentures issued since 2015, nor will there ever be again. Done and dusted.
All documented evidence. Don’t you think the other side would call out IF there wasn’t evidence?
It’s all about facts and documentation. Irrefutable facts.
Nope, no revisionist history allowed by ANYONE.
All of the public Court Papers and filings are evidence.
Misinformation.
To reiterate , no shareholders were destroyed. Neither loan was ever converted. The plan was to pay them off because funding was substantial. The reaudit canceled that plan. Just one of the mitigating factors that are undeniable and documented.
The loans were “settled” litigation on June 18,2018 , but paid less as a discount because DBMM was able to renegotiate. New info put DBMM in the driver’s seat. Remember Hope Capital case Ordered Undertakings.
Flourless debentures Huh?
They were never converted and info was from Court Filings and documented to SEC as proof of what the reaudits cost and what was lost.
Asher still is an active corporate entity according to documentation provided last week, but they were surely put out of operating business.
All my posts are based on court papers or filings so it is documented. It is chronologically accurate and is not opinion.
Full stop.
Get chronology correct and read court papers.
The 2 remaining loans would have been paid easily as (documented) funding was in hand coincident with filing the 10-k that year. Two weeks before filing, the SEC reaudit mandated.
And so it began, reaudit, litigation, lost funding.
IMO Asher was sorry they ever tried to steal DBMM. Their went out of business . Full stop.
That was yesterday, this is today, and the future for DBMM staying the course tenaciously is very, very bright.
All factual posters and readers will find the brief informative.
To be clear: MF is one of the most iconic of SEC litigation attorneys who has made law over and over. She also wins.
Question: Is the world flat?
Digital avenues are allowed by the SEC because the world has changed and digital access to shareholders is appropriate.
Read MF brief, (April, 2021) which Enforcement did not respond to.
The PFR was Enforcement view, superseded by Corp Fin and they will be called on it. If their Corp Fin comments were validated, they must be filed in EDGAR as affecting the status of the filings. They are not. Deliberate ploy to delay.
The Commission needing briefs when responding in Jan, 2021 to Enforcement’s PFR of Dec 2019 because all Commissioners were new and over a year after PFR Motion. There was no one as Chair as GG not appointed in Dec 19. No Chair and all new sitting Commissioners , so no one knew anything about the case and used Enforcement’s language to grant PFR. What was key, however, and stated in granting the PFR:
The Commission concluded that “‘briefing in the ordinary course…would assist the Commission. This appeal raises issues as to which we have an interest in articulating our views and important matters of public interest , including the proper application of the standard that governs determination of sanctions in a Section 12(j) proceeding.”
IMO , The Commission intends to articulate that one size does not fit all—and this is a matter of public policy. That is why there is judicial discretion as stated by Chief Justice Foelak in her Dismissal. Gateway factors in place.
Totally incorrect . Corp Finance would NOT have filed into EdGAR if they, as the policy makers, were not the last word.
Enforcement thought they emigrate and cherry-pick old opinions from 2017-2028 Corp Fin and carry them forward, when DBMM went directly to the management and got approval for being totally compliant. That is why they there is an Edgar filing, the SEC Final word, and why DBMM has been deemed compliant and JudgeFoelak rendered a Dismissal.
No opinions required, these are the documented facts.
Enforcement
The SEC has allowed for Updates on Company sites to be interchangeable with Press Releases as long as publicly available to shareholders.
Have posted the order /regulation many times already.
Agree with tomato/tomato.
Asher may not be operational but remains a company, just like all the networks of Kramer companies.
Still, active Company isn’t it??
https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_ny/3711184
Nope, Not according to SEC ALJ Chief Justice Foelak., who said DBMM tried to protect its shareholders from a series of mitigating circumstances, especially Asher.
All the facts attested in Court Papers and Company filings , so do a little math, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent from the reaudit to the litigation through the cure and the SEC , which could have been spent on growing the Company— the whole intent of acquiring Digital Clarity. The Company’s MD&As state how distractions had to be dealt with first.
From the Asher network and others who saw a way to steal the company and/or by shorting the stock
In nefarious ways.
Instead DBMM stopped them and had continued to thwart them. The Judge stated in an attempt to protect the shareholders.
The Court Papers briefed by the Company lawyer indicate the bad actors who are defined by SEC and FINRA are known . They will be dealt with . but for now, dropping the CE is enough.
The CE will drop and the Company will grow as it intended since the reaudit , which happened soon after the acquisition. All this time , effort, money and resources could have been spent on growth and targeting additional acquisitions.
Stay tuned.
Neither true.
Cannot go on forever as the Company has legal options, like an expedited hearing in DC which will be open to the public. For one, and there are others.
This case had been prosecutorial overreach and sloppy work, IMO. Read Maranda Fritz’s brief— which Enforcement never answered.
And DBMM has fulfilled every requirement and why they are Pink Current. Only remaining is 15c2-11, which is in process sponsored by broker.
Agree for sure time to return to normal trading and normal business.
But need to clarify: Enforcement is one division which appeared because there were late filings, which have been cured for years. They have no authority to direct anything so want to be clear.
The Commission has to close the case. The full Commission is GG and new Commissioners, and they has recent brief from dbmm( Very good read, April 2021 by Maranda Fritz) and a brief from Enforcement.
The Commission did NOT disagree with the Judge. Enforcement, 1 of the 4 divisions didn’t agree .
Enforcement did not read Corp Fin’s approval in EdGAR. Enforcement’s cherry picked people never spoke to the Company and were superseded by NEW Corp Fin review and amendment to 10-k and filed accordingly in EdGAR.
Enforcement asked for the review ignoring the policy makers in Corp Fin on Oct 5, 2019 . Dismissal followed.
The Commission has to close the case . That’s all.
They are working to protect short sellers, of all varieties.
DBMM went for the throat with Asher and will do the same here , IMO.
And hearings in DC are public, aren’t they? Now there is sunlight and disinfectant.
But let’s drop CE first and come fully armed with facts.
Wrong,
A Super 10-K submission was approved, as required , by the SEC Judge in order to cure delinquent filings.
That was approved by the Judge, and if Q’s are required, than a Super 10-K would not be allowed.
Shining a light on the absurdity of approving a Super 10-k which are annual audits of financial statements, so all data is AUDITED and then suggest quarterly Q’s are required when Q’s are reviews , has no logic as stated by Judge Foelak.
There would be no Super 10-k approved if that was the case. The Commission approved Super 10-ks, Enforcement doesn’t make the rules, Corp Finance does with concurrence by the Commission.
Corp Fin approved DBMM submission and filed in EdGAR on October 5, 2019 and the case dismissed November 12, 2019.
These are facts and they will prevail, and the CE will be dropped by FINRA , just like DBMM was acknowledged Pink Current on September 28,2021.
Expect action and stay tuned.
The ban on US buying was September 28, 2021, coincident with the amendments to the 15c2-11.
DBMM was suspended for 10 days coincident with delayed filings AP on May 17,2017 , Expert Market until acknowledged Pink Current.
CE Removal is underway and very visible.
Two extensions for delayed filings on DBMM, when there has never been an extension before.
The highlighted prosecutorial misconduct could stand some sunlight as a disinfectant.
Commissioners have been replaced and replaced and no one is paying attention to this case which should have concluded with the Dismissal. IMO That will prove to be a grevious error for 1 of 4 divisions in the SEC.
There will be action here, ignore childish speculation. Wheels are turning, DBMM is Pink Current and unshaken.
Just stay tuned.
The legal standing is the Judge’s Order, the Dismissal.
That is the legal standing, not an individual’s opinion.
What easy way? To agree to be revoked? That puts the Company out of business. Short sellers love that “easy way.”
Rather show some grit, and provide evidence that the genesis of the problem was the reaudit and the subsequent events caused to a small, developing company with a new acquisition and growth model.
Why does the SEC come after OTC companies only? This is a public policy issue which deserves analysis. The SEC’s litigation statistics since 2016 which are public information are cause for concern: Every year approximately 120 cases are for delayed filings , which are between 12-15% of total litigation and ONLY brought on OTC
companies. How are same numbers appearing like a target every year?
When there are mitigating circumstances as Gateway allows, compliance first, then dismissal is the appropriate solution.
DBMM “punishment” lacks proportionality —also a legal test in litigation. Instead DBMM tenaciously provided 3 years at a cost of over $150k documented, litigation because of reaudit, loss of funding,requirement to find proper long-term investors —all through no fault of DBMM .
All documented. All public information.