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.
With whales supporting compliance, waiving interest, canceling Convertible Debentures and putting a war chest together for growth post-removal of CE.
They only want to get to NASDAQ ASAP, enough dithering.
And if Enforcement’s superseded opinion prevailed, IT would have been filed in EDGAR and be part of the filings.
The Super 10-K sole purpose is to expedite the audited reporting of facts, not review docs as Judge Foelak determined in her dismissal.
Enforcement’s rankings of their opinions are not relevant unless latest Corp Gin review agrees and files with 10-Ks in EDGAR.
For right now, this subject should be closed on the basis that DBMM is not cleared to trade in the US and certain data may not yet be available.
DBMM Shareholders - Please do NOT call SEC.
Everything and all information is AVAILABLE ONLINE PUBLICLY about DBMM.
Calling SEC for our own stock is harmful. So do NOT call.
Of course NSS are NOT shown in a report which is public information, because NSS are ILLEGAL.
DUH!
Article on short selling in this week’s NY Magazine.
Bad guys searching for companies having problems with regulators, start ups etc to short and ruin essentially.
https://www.magzter.com/stories/Lifestyle/New-York-magazine/Last-Sane-Man-on-Wall-Street
Do I have to cite the Lynn Tilton/Patriarch Partners case which went on for years and Enforcement wanted $200million and a zillion sanctions? Was cited
The Judge dismissed the case and this was a Wells Notice case with disgorgement , so financial case.
So it is truly absurd when there are cases of financial statements and Section 5 violations that a late filings case would shake the halls of judicial integrity, if a dismissal was upheld.
There would be no need for due process or an AP. There would be absolute rules, and no due process, and thus no need for a judge or expenditure of taxpayer’s money.
In due process, it is all about mitigating external circumstances, over which the Company had no control and the impact of those circumstances on the Company’s ability to meet requirements and current compliance.
If the Company had been able to leverage the monies spent on the mitigating circumstances, they would be headed toward another acquisition and toward NASDAQ.
A dismissal from a sitting judge has never been overturned,
The Commissioners are appointed and have no legal standing and simply do not overturn a dismissal.
The simple way to cut through omissions and extracts is to fully read Judge Foelak’s dismissal and the Commission’s request for briefs. They all were new and needed summaries. Not any of the hyperbole included in more of your opinion and
A PFR which Enforcement restated a point of view the Judge already took into consideration as stated in the dismissal. There were mitigating circumstances . Full stop.
Over 2 years after dismissal and frivolous PFR, read Attorney Maranda Fritz’s brief in response to Commission’s request for briefs in Jan 2021. The brief is dated March, 2021.
The Commission had all new members and no one had tenure from the beginning of the AP. The Commission wanted a summary .
Repeat: read MF brief. The PFR was an overreach and Enforcement ‘s attempt at more delay. Incredible waste of tax money.
Foelak also said there were mitigating circumstances and the Company’s actions showed compliance and started acting in the shareholder’s interests.
It is boring for comments to be taken out of context , facts omitted and superseded citations ignored.
DBMM investors are not stupid!
It nowhere says shareholder lists available to the public.
They are not.
Absolutely not. Shareholder Lists are NOT public information. Show me that list if that is public information.
Always old info, incomplete and superseded.
Read MD& A “DBMM has been honing its commercial model since the acquisition of DC in 2011 which has been cash-flow positive since it’s acquisition.
Acquisition completed end-2012
SEC Re-Audit Mandate-Nov 2013. 2weeks before 10-k and mezzanine financing execution. All documentation in hands of SEC via Confidentiality Court Order issued by Judge .
Transfer agents DO NOT produce NOBO/OBO List.
Only issuers can request and pay for such lists after certain criteria is met, FROM INDEPENDENT FOR-PROFIT COMPANY. Those lists are password protected and privacy protected.
Transfer agents have no access, nor should they.
Broadridge is the company providing the majority of NOBO/OBO lists to Issuers and follow with below.
Broadridge is a service provider to public companies for all information/communications regarding shareholders after the issuer meets their requirements eg proxy services, NOBO/OBO Lists. Costs based on services.
facts are the facts
Check the extensions. There has never been an extension for a Delayed Filings Dismissal Order.
Those extensions have been for Wells Notices, Cease & Desist Orders , Trading Sanctions and the like. All of which have financial fines which Late Filings do not.
Stop the nonsense.
DBMM is quietly moving forward one step at a time amidst an onslaught of challenges faced. The majority of them are behind the Company.
What is pitiful, but really annoying, is misinformation from people who know nothing about the hurdles DBMM has met.
Important to note as stated in the last several Updates to Shareholders since the cure of the delayed filing and dismissal of the action by Judge Foelak :
-the Company has strong , long-term financial supporters assuring reporting compliance
-the Company has renegotiated Debt which eliminated significant past, present and future interest, details in 10-k filed Nov 5th and in Update following
-the Company will continue to renegotiate debt with the proviso of removing convertible debt
-no convertible debt issued since 2015, and none in future as corporate policy
-removal of CE with broker sponsorship underway
- Growth Capital thereafter
-Acquisition(s) search after TBD revenues
-The Company focus is to get to NASDAQ through growth initiatives, both organic and by acquisition.
-Stay tuned, this is a long-term play with tenacity and lots of support.
MUST READ. POSTED TODAY.
In case you hadn’t seen latest Power Up Lending and (RICO IMO) group of Kramer co’
https://www.lawcommentary.com/articles/echoing-recent-sec-actions-in-similar-suits-music-tech-public-company-vnue-inc-sues-power-up-lending-group-ltd-curt-kramer-in-toxic-lender-lawsuit
Asher is out of business but there are other companies all considered part of the Kramer Bros enterprise.
Power Up Lending absorbed Asher business
Mazuma
Hope Capital
There is parent company —3 initials, first one “K”. Seth Kramer is CEO
Curt Kramer and his network of toxic lending cos
https://www.lawcommentary.com/articles/echoing-recent-sec-actions-in-similar-suits-music-tech-public-company-vnue-inc-sues-power-up-lending-group-ltd-curt-kramer-in-toxic-lender-lawsuit
Citadel is an active market marker for DBMM.
Deductive reasoning.
Citadel and a zillion different ways they used their market maker position to convolute the normal trading system.
PERFECT EXAMPLE OF FALSE STATEMENT!!I
You know that this was expunged and the Company started its evidence of mitigating circumstances under a Confidential Order by the same Judge in Jan 2018. All bets off.
Check their date of the extract . The fall of 2017.
AP dismissed November 12,2018.
DBMM> STRATEGIC ACTIONS GOING FORWARD..... STAY TUNED
Strategic actions forward…
-Removal of CE
-Final Order confirming Dismissal.
-Funding of Organic Growth as stated in 10-Ks and Q’s including Super 10-K, following Final Order
-Target Acquisition (s)
-NASDAQ simple
Stay tuned...
An audit does confirmations of contracts, and proprietary technology, patterns and interviews and signatory affirmations as part of the audit process.
The Company who cooks the books and hands over their cherrypicked material gets a cease and desist sooner rather than later and gets sanctioned. 45 days to prepare is what is provided by the SEC for EACH year, assuming companies have the resources to pay all the service providers who must attest to each step of the way, that is accountants, attorneys, transfer agent, edgarizer, administrative input all coordinated by various members of the auditor’s team. And the confirmations require input from external sources , often with very hectic schedules and follow up required. Do not minimize and stridently state your opinions which have no basis in fact or experience.
DBMM Management has both extensive blue chip and entrepreneurial experience and intends to hone a high performance company and put the crap behind it.
Experience has been that DBMM had not a scintilla of issue beyond late filings. Not one wrong statement or number. That meant each audit laboriously must be done chronologically with seamless trial balances built year on year.
A public company reaudit , like the original audit, must be independent and public company auditors MUST be approved by the SEC. No previous audit work papers can be provided nor can they be reviewed, consulted or even read.
That meant 3 years had to be begun from the earliest and chronologically built from a trial balance from year one. If you look at the form on Google it suggests a 10-k is estimated to take 2,326.62 “burden of hours” to prepare. The reaudit was in addition to acquisition integration activities in a public company when the technology and operations are in the UK, with the growth planned to be US.
You have no way of knowing the nuances and the intricacies of a public company , unless you have been there. It is easy to be a Monday morning Quarterback, but bet you know what every position should have done?
Management has the experience and has had the experience and the grit to get the Company to a dismissal and it will take it across the finish line to execute the growth plan going forward. And they will keep us posted. Count on it.
Stay tuned, NASDAQ here we come.
The acquisition was and is intended to be the first of several acquisitions which was on a growth path until hurdles got in the way.
It is sheer stupidity and lack of any corporate business acumen to think a company acquired a start up with a growth plan , should be able to meet all the challenges, grow and be profitable while having to fight ridiculous reaudits, litigation, and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars . The costs of maintaining a public company is high until growth occurs, and DBMM has worked hard to get to this point. Remember in 2018, pre-pandemic had revenues of $536,501, amidst all the chaos. If the Company could have put the hundreds of thousands of dollars into growth , the Company could have leveraged it toward NASDAQ qualification.
The Company will, as their Updates indicated, get there and DC is Company number 1 and there will be organic growth while seeking additional acquisition targets to hasten the growth process.
Stay tuned, NASDAQ here we come.
The 10k about to be filed, had to be reaudited as well.
The reaudit of every company on the sanctioned auditor’s list of clients is overreach, when the SEC declared the other clients had no culpability.
The reaudit requirement was a function of the Enron case and the legislation called Sarbannes Oxley. There is evolving comments and case law as to whether the reaudit should be modified as does not provide any public scrutiny, but rather is onerous on non-culpable companies. Also a regulation which causes large amounts of unnecessary monies to be spent. It is a regulation which could be eliminated as there is no quantifiable value to shareholders.
There was not one change to financial statements in DBMM’s reaudit with a new audito and the $157,300 costs.
It’s called one of the mitigating circumstances and the genesis of DBMM’s unnecessary challenges.
DBMM doing fine with acquisition and debt service until SEC reaudit and litigation
It was the Great Recession and there was no funding available. Citicorp actually got funding during the same period from Abu Dhabi.
There is documentation that the SEC
Actually cared, DBMM got a Confidential Order from the Court to produce the costs of the SEC mandated reaudit. The Company produced both the funding and payments of the costs of 3-years of reaudit. The litigation was additional.
That is what was a few components of mitigating circumstances which the Judge and the Court acknowledged and acted upon.
Late filings only, then DBMM Motioned in response that there were mitigating circumstances as to why the Company was unable to file on time.
A sequence of mitigating external circumstances which were not in DBMM’s control:
SEC mandated Reaudit 3 years of filings because the Company’s Auditor was sanctioned , and although nothing to do with DBMM, all clients had to reaudit. This mandate occurred 2-weeks before the Company was about to file its annual 10-K, so a reaudit requirement made the Company immediately non-compliant.
Asher immediately sued because their debenture could not be converted because DBMM was non-compliant.
It cost DBMM $157,300. to reaudit 3-years, and litigation costs on top of that meant there was simply not enough resources to cover filings.
SEC filed an Administrative Proceedings because of delinquent filings because
Asher issued a false PR when they tried to steal the Company by taking over the operating affiliate in the UK, even though they had a Consent Decree with the SEC that they would not take any shares in a public company or its subsidiaries.
Super 10-k filed 5/31/18.
Settle with Asher at DBMM’s terms on 6/20/18.
DBMM filed on time since then.
Judge Foelak dismissed case 11/12/19.
There are traders outside the US who buy and sell as traders and are allowed to do so.
Huge difference between DBMM and Saving2Retire LLC OIP.
Saving2Retire LLC is a Cease & Desist Order because a company has not registered properly and is trying to operate as if they are proper investment advisors.That is fraud, ergo the Cease & Desist.
DBMM getting it done 1 thing at a time.
1. Cured past delinquencies (caused by mitigating circumstances)
2. Got current since the last 3+ years
3. Got clearance from SEC Corp FIN
4. WON Initial Decision from SEC Most experience Admin Law Judge
5. Got PINK Current with OTC Markets.
Next --> EVERYONE SHOULD FOCUS ON RECENT DBMM UPDATES
http://www.dbmmgroup.com/news-information/
1. 15c2-11 filing
2. FINRA approval
3. CE down
4. OIP dismissal. What is 90 days when we waited for years.
5. Growth with TOP 10 Award winning digital company
6. NASDAQ
Like, large companies, the SEC has a hierarchy of divisions reporting to a division executive , the Commission is a board with Gary Gensler as its Chairman. The Board/Commission members are appointed—not elected.Divisions are silos, and often ask for input, but are not required to do so.
false statements about one division “wouldn’t let” another division say or do anything is ludicrous!
Read MF brief: Enforcement asked certain members in June 2018 to comment on Super 10-k with no discussion with the Company. The Judge asked for a Corp Fin review at the hearing in DC at which the Judge presided and Company attended in March 2019. Thereafter, MF coordinated directly with Corp Fin and any required, final amendments made. Finally. In October, 2019 the review was finalized as completed and an EDGAR filing made.
It is nonsense to post items that the Judge discarded as not of value to shareholders once the Super K /audit filed.
Enforcement including it in court papers is more overreach , DESPITE if you agree or not.
Be clear Corp Fin are policy determinators, not Enforcement. Each had their role, they do not integrate. The Judge then makes decisions and the Commission Final Orders. The EdGAR Corp Fin correspondence is the Company record for filing.
FULL STOP.
Enforcement Shapiro elicited by Rngorcement in June, 2018 NOT June, 2019.
Very strong statement from the Judge in quotes which admonishes Enforcement for its overreach.
Should be clarified (again) that CORP FIN emphatically cleared Digital Brand by having its letter of Oct 2019 filed in EDGAR as part of the filing history. The earlier comments elicited in June 2019 by Enforcement for their Responses in the AP were never filed in EDGAR and formalized as part of filing history. Very minimal value when evaluating the record. That was made clear by the Judge.
An Administrative Proceeding is not an investigation. That is a company who received a Wells Notice or a fraud investigation.
A termination letter from the SEC is not their process.
More misinformation.
Starting with Item 1 FALSE.
Enforcement is a division of the SEC, not the Commission.
The SEC has NOT said anything about compliance except to agree and allow OTC Markets to acknowledge we are Pink Current .
Point being; Took over a year to issue PFR , many new Commissioners, wanted briefs after that time.
The pandemic shut down the SEC so it didn’t function for almost a year. By Jan 21 they needed new summaries/briefs.
Enforcement is often over-zealous and absurd to waste taxpayers on delayed filings. Why do you think they turned over delayed filings to the OTC and amended 15c2-11?
Commissioners are rarely attorneys, they are the oversight group. REPEAT: They have never overturned a Judge’s dismissal decision .
And the judge said there was NO value to shareholders to do Q’s in a Super 10-k, when audits of those years already took place and is the purpose of a Super 10k
Enforcement continued even though in October 2018 Corp Fin closed the review following the last amendment.
In other words the Judge used the most recent decision from Corp Fin , not the carpetbagger Enforcement brought in June 2018.
The dates are demonstrative of superseded info
FYI The latest Corp Fin review/clearance is filed in EDGAR integrating it with filing history, while the earlier comments are only in the Responses from Enforcement. Stop citing something not part of SEC Filing History. Corp Fin spoke directly through EDGAR.