I have done some "elementary background research" into this, and...

I have done some "elementary background research" into this, and I imagine others have too, and would refer you to my posts about it in a number of threads. Surely reading these threads is all part of the research process.

Please suggest an alternative marketing strategy that would be as inexpensive, and effective, especially over a challengingly short pre-launch timescale (which is deliberate to limit competitive advantage and to allow quicker double-tap release of both Miggster Mobile and Premium products in close succession). Think about what is in the best interest of EM1 and try and think fiscally and from the point of view of business strategy.

Emerge is not Crowd1 - weve been over this, and unregulated companies like crowd1 always attract the attention of regulators, its all part of the game in an emerging market, no different to crypto and bleeding edge tech, biotech - etc...
Also, big competition actively pushes for regulation of companies that stand to gain a competitive advantage, and lobby strongly to make this happen (pharma have done this and there are all kinds of stories about big pharma lobbying senators and FDA - and plenty of facts interspersed with rather funny conspiracies but plenty of facts).
So dont treat every "investigation" as a sign of guilt, we are way too judgmental these days, of individuals and organisations. If crowd1 stand to pay their members and comply with Consumer Protection Act, then there is simply NO PROBLEM - time will tell. The countries that have banned them also want to ban crypto and are opposed to free market economy, which goes against most peoples political leanings here as investors in corporations. I love free market and competition - it is similar to Darwins theory of natural selection - we end up with the strongest most resilient companies providing what is most in demand - which helps stabilise economies (US tech sector has been a stabilising force for the US economy throughout the last few downturns). Over regulation and legislation that works against free markets is very harmful - so I don't put as much weight on the "investigation". anyone can make a complaint. We just note it down as a source of risk (just like commodity prices, export demands, drilling success for mining companies).

What I think is that people see uncertainty - which is always prevalent in speccies - some make projections, do research and share it with others and are happy to invest, others want to wait to see actual revenue first before investing and will wait (which is fine, plenty of upside IMO), some others arent interested and see it as too risky (many people felt this way about BNPL and Afterpay) and I completely understand that. What I don't understand is the excessive criticism - and claim that 'the music will stop' - this is a bit too far I think, we don't know what might happen. You are bearish, I am bullish, but lets let everyone make up their own mind.

Calling Emerge a farce to me is a translation that you see too much risk and are not willing to invest in projections and would prefer to wait until its a proven revenue producer - because then there would be no uncertainty. I just translate downramping comments this way now. I for one think that uncertainty is all part of the game, and I don't like trying to capitalise on the uncertainty and affect someones decision making by implying that 'the music will stop'. We also have zero debt - an asset (MTN Arena) growing in subscriber base, and potentially company making assets on the way. Surely you arent basing your opinion on the present market cap, and the cash in bank (I would also add that Emerges cash burn has decreased in last few reporting period reflecting excellent fiscal discipline leading up to these asset launches).