Replies to post #163240 on DD Support Board and Research Team

[lucky, mydog]

that's going to make them crazy.

[Monksdream]

I just got in from the glass shop where Snapper kindly sawed some 2x4 to the specified lengths.

That is a highly detailed letter, and also makes a lot of technical points backed by precedent. I kind of think it implies that the judge isn't in a position of telling the SEC how to do its job.

Obviously this letter is asking for a review, which the judge must consider. Seriously consider.

And then there is FINRA.

[1manband]

Looks like poor DBMM had the judge's revocation ruling appealed...

.

GOOD! That ruling went against all precedence. It is an outlier, and bad law. It needs to be overturned and DBMM have it shares revoked.

No company should be allowed to get away with no filings for 3 years, then be allowed to catch up only when the SEC takes action. And then filing clearly deficient filings to boot.

DBMM made a mockery of the laws - they need to be held accountable for their violations.

[janice shell]

That's interesting. The SEC is--in my opinion rightly--concerned that if the ALJ's initial decision is made final, it'll be used as precedent by other delinquent companies trying to avoid revocation of registration.

It's not hard to see why that is of concern to Enforcement.

[tdbowieknife]

This review wouldn't be done by the same Judge, would it?

.

[Monksdream]

All I can say at this juncture is Linda Perry has to wait a bit longer to find a market maker so the company stock can be openly quoted.

What I'm watching now is the trading throughout the day indicates someone will pay 0.004 and the next trade will be for 0.0045 then back to 0.004 and so on and so forth.

What I'm insinuating is who is, or are, swapping shares just to make the trading appear active and thus implying a certain degree of liquidity.

In the murky world of the OTC it is not uncommon for the pumpers to place an ordinary human being on a pedestal and imbue him or her with magical powers.