No, revocation in this case is very much needed.
DBMM not only didn’t file FOR YEARS, but they INTENTIONALLY didn’t file. They’ve come right out and admitted that they believed they could catch up on filings “later”, when THEY wanted to.
The history of SEC revocations is FULL of companies that did the SAME EXACT THINGS. Companies that thumbed their noses at the SEC. Until the SEC began revocation proceedings. Then suddenly, lo and behold, the companies began filing their delinquent financials!
The SEC unequivocally states that the reason they believe DBMM should be revoked is because if they don’t, it will encourage other companies to not to file timely financial reports. It will give other companies the ability to say “so what if we didn’t file on time? DBMM didn’t file for years, then you let THEM catch up and file when THEY wanted to”.
No. DBMM broke the rules FOR YEARS. Then ignored the SEC’s requests for information for ANOTHER YEAR. Finally, when the SEC started the OIP and revocation proceedings, Linda WOKE UP to the fact that DBMM was about to get revoked.
Only THEN did DBMM start to TRY to become compliant.
They need to go.
I keep telling myself....deep breath....count to ten....try to answer without personal attack...if available, always try to present fact to back up your opinion.
AI
