InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 71
Posts 1840
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/10/2017

Re: Jetmek_03052 post# 289626

Monday, 03/06/2023 2:04:38 PM

Monday, March 06, 2023 2:04:38 PM

Post# of 347554
I agree with a lot you say, as you know. Because I am a fundamental trader. Obviously, you can't be a strict fundamentalist in the OTC. A lot of wing and a prayer company's here.
I can't defend DBMM fundamentally because there is none. I can factual say something has changed here to allow for this 2.0 everyone is speaking. Which honestly is a good description, considering 1.0 was $hit.
I in no way adopt the theory that all the successes fighting the SEC is a valid reason to assume DBMM will be a profitable business. I will, however, say that it does pose a significant opportunity should management want to start a business where DBMM 1.0 was.

As far as the decision, it is somewhat semantical, but how the rule reads, the ALJ decision is a binding decision unless challenged and overthrown. Only one part of that has occurred. It has been challenged. Until the commission renders a decision, the initial decision is the acting decision.
As for further court battles, that would be highly speculative, although your opinion is certainly possible.