Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[Poo28]

Day after day shareholders post examples ,  of posts re telling lies and scare revocation tactics about DBMM . That didn’t work! Then you bring in Renee who wrote long missive about shareholders writing Management and the Company’s attorney “begging for revocation “ . See below

And then came the dismissal.  The bashers brigade have one  agenda, and that is to damage DBMM. We shareholders know their manchild cartoons, memes, bold font, colors are intended deflections . They simply need their gigs which is truly pathetic.

DBMM long and strong
____________________________________________________________
Renne

Re: None

Sunday, December 04, 2022 11:20:49 AM

Post#  of 346206 

A DBMM advocacy post: If there is another 90 day extension tomorrow it is plausible to think there could be interminable 90 day extensions. No-one wins with the interminable 90 day extensions, not the SEC D.O.E., not A.L.J. Foelak, and most importantly, not Digital Brand Media.

So then, instead of the very unproductive back and forth bantering on whether the SEC D.O.E. is wrong or right, or Digital Brand Media is wrong or right, or A.L.J. Foelak was wrong or right, shareholders can individually or as a group contact Maranda Fritz and Linda Perry directly and suggest the following:

#1. Maranda Fritz as DBMM's Lawyer and Linda Perry could negotiate a deal with the SEC D.O.E. to accept revocation that protects the SEC D.O.E. demand for "precedents' (i.e. revocation), protects the judicial integrity of A.L.J. Foelak's Initial Decision, and provides a window for DBMM to quickly reregister with the SEC whereby the SEC commits to not holding up a FORM 10 to reregister with interminable questions. DBMM could be reregistered within 60 days, and DBMM could again ask a Market Maker to submit a FORM 211 to FINRA to obtain quotations. Optimal timeframe 90 days, the equivalent of one 90 day extension.....no more Caveat Emptor and no more 90 day extensions!! Everyone wins.

#2. Maranda Fritz and Linda Perry could cite a D.O.E. recommendation in their O.I.P. against Legacy Xchange Inc. that had their registration revoked on Nov. 30,2022. In the D.O.E.'s arguments they wrote "If, after revocation, Legacy is able to meet the relevant requirements, it may file a Form 10 to re-register its securities under Exchange Act Section 12(g)". This is the first time I have seen this inclusion in a D.O.E. argument for revocation, and Maranda Fritz and Linda Perry could negotiate a deal citing the D.O.E.'s own words.

Page 13 section 58, after the Secretary's signature:

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/2022/34-96401.pdf

I suggest not contaminating any contact with Maranda Fritz or Linda Perry with NSS conspiracies. Wouldn't they already know if there was an NSS issue with DBMM?

DBMM'ers have my permission to copy my post and send it to Maranda Fritz and Linda Perry.