Replies to post #232095 on Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[johnydollar]

$DBMM = money power keg just about to go off, great confirm there. Thanks for posting that. $DBMM

[Jetmek_03052]

What ARE you talking about?

BOTH Phlo Corp and E-Smart WERE REVOKED by the COMMISSION!


PHLO Corp (Ticker PHCP) was REVOKED by the SEC!


https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1012130/999999999713013294/filename1.pdf

"Solely for the purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the Commission, or to which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings herein, except as to the Commission’s jurisdiction over it and the subject matter of these proceedings, which are admitted, Respondent consents to the entry of this Order Making Findings and Revoking Registration of Securities
Pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as to Phlo Corp. (“Order”), as set forth below.

On the basis of this Order and Respondent’s Offer, the Commission finds that
:
1. PHCP (CIK No. 1012130) is a void Delaware corporation located
in Jacksonville, Florida with a class of securities registered with the Commission under Exchange Act Section 12. On March 30, 2007, the Commission entered an order that, among other things, ordered that PHCP cease-and-desist from committing or being a cause of any violations of Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder. In the Matter of Phlo Corporation, et al., Admin. Proc. File No. 3-11909, Exchange Act Rel. No. 55562 (March 30, 2007).

PHCP has violated the cease-and-desist order. As of August 5, 2010, the common stock of PHCP was quoted on the Pink Sheets, had six market makers, and was eligible for the piggyback exception of Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11(f)(3).

2. PHCP has failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and
Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder because it has not filed any periodic reports with the Commission since the period ended December 31, 2007.
IV.

In view of the foregoing, the Commission deems it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors to impose the sanction specified in Respondent’s Offer.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
Pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Exchange Act, the registration of each class of Respondent’s securities registered pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12 be, and hereby is, revoked."



E-SMART was also REVOKED in the same manner as PHLO!

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1112999/999999999712006081/filename1.pdf


"The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors to accept the Offer of Settlement submitted by e-Smart Technologies, Inc. (“Respondent”) pursuant to Rule 240(a) of the Rules of Practice of the
Commission, 17 C.F.R. § 201.240(a), for the purpose of settlement of these proceedings initiated against Respondent on January 19, 2012, pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (“Exchange Act”).

II.

Solely for the purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the Commission, or to which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings herein, except as to the Commission’s jurisdiction over it and the subject matter of these proceedings, which are admitted, Respondent consents to the entry of this Order Making Findings and Revoking Registration of Securities Pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as to e-Smart Technologies, Inc. (“Order”), as set forth below.

III.
On the basis of this Order and Respondent’s Offer, the Commission finds that:

1. e-Smart Technologies, Inc. (CIK No. 0001112999), a Nevada corporation
located in New York, New York, designs, markets and sells biometric smart cards. At all times relevant to this proceeding, the securities of e-Smart Technologies, Inc. have been registered under Exchange Act Section 12(g). Prior to October 17, 2008, e-Smart’s stock
(symbol ESTT) was quoted on OTC Link (previously, “Pink Sheets”) operated by OTC Markets Group Inc. (“OTC Link”) where it had no market makers and was not eligible for the “piggyback” exception of Exchange Act rule 15c2-11(f)(3). On October 17, 2008, the Commission suspended trading in e-Smart’s stock pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12(k),
and OTC Link subsequently delisted it.

2. e-Smart Technologies, Inc. has failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder, while its common stock was registered with the Commission, in that it has not filed an Annual Report on Form 10-K since May 28, 2009 for the period ending December 31, 2007 or periodic or quarterly reports on Form 10-Q for any fiscal period subsequent to its fiscal quarter ending September 30, 2007, which eSmart filed on April 3, 2008.

IV.

In view of the foregoing, the Commission deems it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors to impose the sanction specified in Respondent’s Offer. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
Pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12(j), registration of each class of Respondent’s securities registered pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12 be, and hereby is, revoked."

[Jetmek_03052]

Quote:

"Also the missing quarterly reports from past years do not benefit investors. What DBMM did was enough to become current per Division Corp manual."

That is completely erroneous!

According to the Corp Fin's comprehensive filing guidelines, any financial numbers from delinquent 10Q filings MUST be included in a comprehensive "Super 10K" filing. It's quite clearly stated, has been copied directly from that manual and posted here before.

Foelak has an OPINION that these reports "are old and do not benefit shareholders". That "opinion is just THAT, and goes directly against regulation. The Board will eventually show Foelak the error of that opinion.

It is not the fault of the SEC that DBMM seems to gravitate to "bad actor" auditors. The auditor in question was suspended WELL BEFORE DBMM'S string of delinquent filings and it's not the fault of the SEC that DBMM used them.

Also, the fact of the matter is that the issue is NOT the suspension of the auditor. The issue is that DBMM became delinquent because of the very STUPID decision to enter into a disastrous "death spiral" financing agreement with ASHER. How can the SEC be blamed for this?

DBMM's sorry state can be directly laid at the feet of ONE PERSON.

That person is Linda Perry.

[jaiguruji7]

Why is the uplist to pink taking so long, looks like the naked shorts and the other Big Guys have an agenda to not let that happen ever, and I believe DBMM will not be able to do anything about it, so they will keep kicking the can down the road, until DBMM gives up and then these crooks win.

Thoughts??

JMHO