Replies to post #175618 on Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[Jetmek_03052]

That’s bull.

No matter WHAT happened with problems with a “previous auditor”, that FACTS ARE:

DBMM made a deliberate decision to abandon their responsibilities to file REQUIRED SEC filings for over TWO YEARS (almost THREE years).

The SEC put them on the Grey Sheets because they didn’t adhere to the filing requirements.

Then they produced a revocation order for DBMM. This revocation order was remanded before it could take effect. The REASON it was remanded was because of reputed problems with the case of SEC versus LUCIA. ALL cases before the ALJ system were ordered to be started over with DIFFERENT ALJ’s, in light of the Lucia case.

The order to remand the revocation order of DBMM’s stock had NOTHING TO DO with anything that DBMM did!

DBMM simply benefited from the SEC’s decision to look at all cases again, in light of the Lucia case.

DBMM has since produced MANY amended filings, ALL of which have been called INSUFFICIENT by the SEC.

As recently as just 15 days ago, the SEC filed a letter to DBMM in which they are STILL calling for the REVOCATION OF DBMM STOCK!

Buyer beware!

[otterman]

The company chose a cheap outfit out of their own volition and didnt bother to remedy the situation until the SEC forced them to.

It was 100% their fault for failing and 100% their fault for failing to remedy. Whats worse is they tried to whine their way out of it instead of just owning up and fixing it. Then when they couldnt file properly they tried to blame the judge, not a good idea.

PS appreciate the message, I for one have not.

[elkonig]

Linda Perry has been involved with DBMM for at least 12 years. The auditor has nothing do with why the financials were not filed in a timely fashion. As per Perrys NT-10Ks and Nt-10Qs the registrants limited resources were the reason for not filing. They are broke, basically they are bankrupt.