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.
FYI- in legal terms this is a Dismissal—a win for Companies who have withstood heavy-handed DOE tactics. Bravo. The division needs to get its house in order.
No spinning to whitewash an Internal Control investigation initiated by the
Commissioner.
That is equivalent to BOD oversight for internal control risk investigations . The buck stops here, at the top of the company, the institution and the regulators. All hierarchical organizations.
DBMM win #10.
DBMM just scored win #10. Another "Never Happen" which just did! Happy Saturday! :)
Shareholders do their own due diligence ,which means the only document of value is the “Order Dismissing Proceedings.” The Order was initiated by the “Chair of the Commission as a comprehensive internal review to assess the scope and potential impact of the control deficiency , which review was conducted by experienced investigative staff from the Division of Examinations under the supervision of the Commission‘s General Counsel.”
This is enormously important . In any institution , any internal control deficiencies which surfaced during a Commissioned /ordered review are extremely serious .
Gensler commissioned this review and 28 companies have AP’s dismissed .
This is the judicial discretion the Company has stated over and over again exhibited by Carol Fox-Foelak which should have concluded the matter 21 days following Nov 12 2019. “…to dismiss , as a matter of discretion..”
The Order said it all.
Shareholders know.
She is a defense attorney of considerable stature and reputation— that means sought after.
An understanding of the legal system is required.
Opinions are just that
Listen carefully—
-The Company issuing CD is notified
- No TA will remove restriction without a legal Opinion . There are cases of SEC not accepting opinions as there are “mills” just turning out opinions which are weak re Rule 144 criteria.
- Company cannot stop conversion if criteria met.
Repeat: The Company does not have approval authority as conversion is in terms of CD if Rule 144 criteria met. The only thing a Company can do is get a injunction and they need evidence to do so.
Otherwise, Companies could stand in way of contract terms being fulfilled as agreed.
Furthermore, the SEC has taken the position in cases that the legal opinion must be from an independent legal counsel approved by the SEC , not an issuers counsel .
The SEC does not like CD’s less and less each year.
The clearing house is selected by lender . Opinions without facts are not accurate.
NO TOXIC DEBT IN DBMM
False statements
No CDs converted since mid-2016. NONE—CDs canceled via settlement one lender at a time, to the benefit of the Company .
Correction to continuing false statements with facts and data in filings and Updates.
There is NO DBMM promotion. Such nonsense
All the false info, is that a negative promotion?
Not the TA responsibility .
It means the lender did not follow the rules of Rule 144 to clear the shares.
No convertible debt , because the shares are prospective in issuance, are registered. In order to issue under terms of CDs must meet criteria of Rule 144.
Something may have been a problem with meeting criteria. Maybe SEC didn’t approve lawyer preparing legal opinion . Proper companies clear lawyer in advance.
Something was wrong with clearing to free trading, yet still called selling unregistered shares.
Generally, not a TA responsibility, if on surface met criteria.
Nonsense.
There are other clearing houses .
DBMM is going to grow both organically and by acquisition.
IMO all false statements or draw erroneous conclusions bordering on conspiracy theories.
Shareholders agree when statements are corrected yet continue as false, and Company has spoken to that situation .
Read my last post, there have been no discussions announced by the Company.
All Company SEC reports are reviewed and approved by Accountant, Attorneys and Auditors, following instructions externally and Principal Executive Officer internally. Education in how to understand how to read a Financial Statements and regulatory text may be helpful.
Updates mirror data in filings and public information.
The Company has stated it announces results when they occur. Strategy, tactics and plans are not appropriate until meet disclosure approval guidelines as instructed, as they are subject to change. That is why a Company has Management.
Shareholders know.
Already responded in Post 302 899 and don’t intend to any more semantic BS.
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholders-update-december-28-2022/
CONTINUED ACCUMULATION OF INFORMATION FOR POTENTIAL ACTION AGAINST STOCK MANIPULATION.
The Company has noted that recent prosecutions by the SEC and the DOJ of named individuals who deliberately manipulate and peddle misinformation, often slanderous are cause for regulatory and public policy concerns. DBMM has long highlighted the negative aspects of those paid to create chaos and scare shareholders. The Company stated in recent Shareholder Updates, that it has sought advice from individuals and organizations prudent in these matters, and participation by third parties in monitoring and gathering information.
Opinions are without facts.
No facts. The way I read the para is there are paid posters also the Company is sick of it. They have hired and affiliated with industry experts.
From my knowledge never has an officer of DBMM posted on iHub or any other platform regarding the Company financial statements. Linda signs and is accountable for everything contained in every filing. IMO everything has been disclosed and is transparent in filings and Updates. Financial Disclosure regs require officers to share info to all public.
Cannot have 1 on 1 discussions which could be misquoted or misconstrued. I have never known this position to change for years.
Also Shareholders have public access to all filings in EdGAR.
Reading a Financial Statement is a skill !
Shareholders find the continuous deluge of false and/or misleading information.
The Company had discussed the issue of manipulation of pps endeavoring to depress. See Update of Dec 28, 2022, let me make it easier by extracting the 3rd paragraph :)
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholders-update-december-28-2022/
CONTINUED ACCUMULATION OF INFORMATION FOR POTENTIAL ACTION AGAINST STOCK MANIPULATION.
The Company has noted that recent prosecutions by the SEC and the DOJ of named individuals who deliberately manipulate and peddle misinformation, often slanderous are cause for regulatory and public policy concerns. DBMM has long highlighted the negative aspects of those paid to create chaos and scare shareholders. The Company stated in recent Shareholder Updates, that it has sought advice from individuals and organizations prudent in these matters, and participation by third parties in monitoring and gathering information.
Shareholders are smart. 2,000+ other companies were kicked off their trading platforms.
DBMM made their case with evidence as allowed by the Supreme Court of the US. .
Proper investors understand and very impressed with DBMM’s tenacity and positioning of mitigating circumstances. DBMM on its way—every win acknowledged .
Shareholders know.
It is curious why false statements are made when the accurate, documented evidence supporting the Company is in the filings?
The Company has had portfolio investors (LTIs) since Oct 2017 that came in to assist in the cure of delayed filings, sponsored broker ID and FINRA approval, CE removal , Uplist , growth both organic and through acquisition and NASDAQ application, each step by step.
So far $1.8million cashflow financing is the support system behind DBMM and will continue . All audited and documented in filings.
Shareholders are not to be mislead. Shareholders know.
Another false statement.
The Company is NOT required to file an 8-K when they hire an attorney. Only independent auditors and Company’s Officers appointments need 8-K filing.
Where these pronouncements come from is misleading and inaccurate.
Draconian opinions do not understand the law and the mission and role of the SEC.
Law includes judicial discretion requiring companies to provide evidence to prove mitigating circumstances.
Law also must be legislated if there is a required revocation everytime filings may be late. Due process is an absolute requirement. If pre-determined outcome , it is not due process and results in what the law calls ‘systemic discrimination.’ SCOTUS could throw out every revocation on that basis.
These are legal facts. DOE overreached as it does frequently and is embarrassed. The Company knows exactly what it is doing and the results will be positive.
Practices and procedures were not followed by DOE and MF brief summarized by timeline that their using cherry-picked Corp Fin staff when DBMM was already taking advice from CF directly, following procedure.The standard comments clearance letter filed in EdGAR and Dismissal followed the next month.
MF brief clearly addresses the DOE overreach. See link
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-17990-2021-03-26-respondent-appellees-brief.pdf
Step by step DBMM is ready to grow. Stay tuned.
Shareholders remain firm that irrespective of facts and events the nevers continue on one note. Yet Company moves ahead and will prevail and win as it has last 9 times.
The amount of wasted taxpayers money on this simple delayed filing situation is egregious—with acknowledged mitigating circumstances—which were cured on May 31,2018 , and filings on time or early for the last 5 years. Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars which could have been reinvested in the business.
Hardly protecting shareholders , nevertheless step by step the Company moves toward wins #10 and #11.
Total nonsense. Pps before FINRA clearance and CE Removal was already low and longs holding. So Crushed for whom?
Retail US could not sell yet until 12.20.23. So the market makers couldn’t churn?
Aged debt cancelation essential and going very well. 1-2 CD lenders totally cancelled each year since 2020 after canceling Asher in 2018 for no equity and a 50% discount.
Sounds you know .... to call de minimus share issuance anything but in best interests of shareholders.
Nothing scares shareholders ;)
Since 2016 OS has increased by 5%. All in filings and available.
DBMM is a public company, and it is ludicrous to try to infer that issuing shares to cancel debt to the benefit of the Company, highly discounted in principal, no interest and elimination of associated derivative liabilities is not in shareholder’s best interests.
Read last Update, it will explain the rationale with appropriate definitions associated with removing aged debt from Financial Statements.
DBMM has been very clear as to intent of aged debt removal.
Update link
https://www.dbmmgroup.com/shareholder-update-april-13-2023/
Real shareholders, know who and why is trying to depress pps.
No fees? Depends on your account status and your broker, just like banks have various categories of customers. Most wealth management portfolio management accounts have no transaction fees. They have totally different structure depending on assets under management.
Many transactional brokers like E*trade and Charles Schwab do not charge fees either. Highly commoditized business, make money through other revenue streams.
Like getting free checking accounts and safe deposit boxes.
Read the Post 302447, (as your response doesn’t acknowledge) paras 2 and 3 address and explain .
Counterfeit shares can be anywhere waiting to deposit It is disingenuous to suggest otherwise.
Institutions and a number of hedge funds trade DBMM.
Premise wrong, institutions always in
Brokerage fees? Huh? Who pays those?
No convertible debt sold or available. I know because none has been sold since May, 2016. That is fact.
That is how I know. Seven years of accurate facts.
No convertible debt converted /released since May, 2016.
There is no convertible debt in market because none has been issued. If convertible debt, the OS would increase.
No increase in OS. Facts are everything
NSS are illegal . The transfer agent and Company count what is required. Fiduciary responsibility includes a reasonable person’s test following the regulator’s instructions.
Counterfeit , phantom, synthetic shares are not necessarily deposited today. Like bearer bonds which are illegal in US but not outside the US.
We have said a zillion times, if so easy~peezy to find, the regulators would not be tearing out their hair trying to ferret them out.
Shareholders know rational thinking is required on documented Information or it is not even an opinion.
Shareholders should do their own DD . If accurate DOE would have included a reference. Nada! Would be impossible to verify. See subsequent posts threads for details .
Totally irrelevant to Dismissal which already acknowledged by ALJ as mitigating circumstance.
Neither of us know the details, thus a Rhetorical statement. For an opinion to be so false is already questionable
Such nonsense.
Shareholders have public access to all filings in EdGAR. My facts are spot on
Reading a Financial Statement is a skill!
What is it about facts that are elusive?
Lucia vs: SEC The Supreme Court of the US remanded all AP ALJ orders in Dec 2017 and allowed for all new evidence.
Facts and DBMM dismissed Nov 12, 2023
Word salad?
Wrong and wrong. Volume? Now that is laughable!
No CDs have been executed since May, 2016. None will be as being settled one by one and CD canceled. Each settlement negotiated. Last one Feb 1,2023, fixed 7.5million shares. See filings.
All CDs considered aged debt.
See OTCM for DBMM. OS verified by TA.
Misinformation corrected.
Each shareholder should do their own Due Diligence . Opinions are not facts.
Naive to suggest that exercise of “ follow the bouncing ball is useful.“ There was never an inference of look what other companies did, as it is irrelevant , and a waste of time. Perhaps other companies did not have mitigating circumstances? DBMM’s mitigating circumstances were evidenced to the ALJ’s satisfaction. The reaudit was the start point, not the rationale for the narrative. Not just reference SEC case, but Court Papers for Asher litigation as well.
See Posts 302258 and 302264
Try and find the clients. Sherb & Co many months in advance of SEC reaudit mandate sold and clients scattered. Their situations not relevant. Not ever an issue.
Just to prove my point, the one size fits all response is incorrect re the Reaudit mandate circumstances. Reauditing 3 years was a massive task as no work papers from sanctioned auditor could be used. According to the SEC each 10-K averages 2,225 hours to prepare. Companies are non-compliant during the reaudit period.
Not a walk in the park.
Sanctioned Audit firm, Sherb & Co. was sold to another Audit firm several months in advance of the SEC sanctions becoming public. The principal, , SS was also having significant health problems (he passed away about 5 years later as I recall) so many of his clients appointed other Auditors for their own reasons.
Suffice to say, no facts as to what clients did or did not do.
Suggest referencing the post being responded to. Two separate subjects. The DBMM Auditor and the Kramer rico-like network of companies are separate situations. I disagree with the premise of each., e.g. Auditor clients reaudited easily and separate , SEC never made exception for Kramers.
Shareholders know how to do Google searches. I am both a shareholder and a business executive and there is no way negotiations, compromises, proposals or all the behind the scenes moving and shaking is public information. You have no way of knowing.
It is illogical to make statements about what actually has transpired privately in any situation. it is an opinion and not a fact.
My question was your statement not the SEC. Of course they have the summary. You , however, have no way of knowing anything about the client list or the outcomes, therefore,a strident statement about other clients out of order. Judge Foelak had access to everything , didn’t she?
DBMM said Reaudit was genesis of late filings following by a series of mitigating circumstances stated which followed. DBMM was granted an order to provide evidence by previous Judge post-remand, under confidential cover as evidence of the mitigating circumstances in Jan 2018. The extenuating circumstances were acknowledged by Judge Foelak in the Dismissal. Also followed by sponsoring broker, FINRA and OTC Markets.
Due diligence integrates info , not a one sentence throwaway which is negative to Company supporters.
How in the world would someone know what went on between the Kramers, their companies and the SEC?
The final sanctions and orders are public info, not what were the deals to get there. And the principals continue and run new Compsny after a company , pay a small fine, a little disgorgement or none now, and keep on keeping on.
Making pronouncements doesn’t make it fact.
All shareholders should do their own Due Diligence.
10-Q’s and all SEC Reports are public information available in EdGAR
Telling the whole story necessary.
Omitting key words as included in my post following the quote is false statement. See Post 302138, the reference, 2nd para.
Repeat— a hard lender is not the same as one sanctioned by the SEC . The Mazuma case was first public info in Nov 2013. Last Asher CD was 2012
Shareholders aren’t stupid .
Shareholders love the falsehoods yet the facts show otherwise. Everything documented as stated.
Relationships are everything and settlements are too.
The only thing that matters is the result. Never a default, never a turnover. Only a very discounted Settlement. CDs canceled, no equity at all.
See Court Papers and DBMM 10-K , Amend #1, 2018, Legal Proceedings. “Case Closed.”