Replies to post #278365 on Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[noradio]

Only if you have the time and inclination would you be interested in commenting on the 90 day extensions that may continue beyond March 5th. I surmise you've read my suggestions that DBMM could end the quagmire they're in by making a deal with the D.O.E. to accept revocation and the SEC expediting a FORM 10 approval for DBMM to reregister. IMO, the D.O.E. keeps their coveted precedents for revoking the registrations of delinquent filers, and A.L.J. Foelak's Initial Decision would no longer be challenged, with no more 90 day extensions, and all DBMM shareholders would be made whole in approximately 90 days whereby the stock could trade unencumbered thereafter. I certainly have no issue if you disagree with me as I could gain more perspective on the matter.

The company should make a deal for revocation? After winning the initial decision, staying current, 211 approval and CE approval? There's only one group that helps, and that's the naked shorts that are trapped big in DBMM.

[Gotham Bay Group]

Renee, the simple answer is, what you propose is definitely a way this could be decided.
That said, most creditable predictions have a conceivable path to the outcome being discussed, same as my suggested path.
I do not believe it likely DBMM to follow your suggested direction at this point. Reason being, is they don't have to, honestly. A considerable effort has been put forth to get here. Frankly, it was also the least likely path to success. What you stated would have been a more practical solution earlier on without a doubt. In fact, I would have fully expected acceptance of revocation and either disappear or start a new application, after DOE suggested to revoke DBMM.

But the reality is they fought and to this point have been successful. I sincerely believe, fighting the attempt to revoke so vigorously is the only reason DBMM is here today.

To the point of unfinished business with the review. Realistically, it is an internal matter that could have external consequences if allowed. The decision has already been made to dismiss. I can't see the commission drawing more attention than necessary on the SEC. Especially, considering current environments around them. I believe I posted a possible outcome that could appease all involved a while back.

The Commssion could side with DOE's position and agree revocation was in order. But the commission has the power to side with the DOE on revocation and at the same moment issue a stay. They would under the rules actually, almost be required too. The commission will issue stays if the result of the decision would unduly harm current shareholders and there is no foreseeable threat to future shareholders. This action would keep face and render DBMM unharmed. It would also leave the ALJ whole because, effectively that is why she awarded dismissal.

Although, depending on the timing of any developments with DBMM, they may choose to take another extention and avoid any unnecessary disruption in the market.

Renee, thank you for the kind words and I hope this makes sense. It should be fairly obvious what type of investor I am speaking to when I post. I am pro DBMM but not pro high risk without all the facts to determine whether the reward is within a reasonable margin.
It was questioned why I am here if I have the ability to trade most anything. I find it interesting it would be assumed I am the only one. Not all investors interact publicly.
I thought it was common knowledge...