SPOOZ Inc (SPZI)

[funmaxus]

Research on Symbology Initiative:

First, please refer to SEC document: SEC Release No. 34-56037, whereby SFB Market Systems was responsible for proposing the symbology initiative. SFB Market Systems http://www.sfbms.com/ is the primary data provider with their primary product, Symbolmaster https://www.symbolmaster.com/, and is a privately owned entity with an investment made by Track Data, TRAC http://www.trackdata.com/ http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/545373/track_data_announces_investment_in_sfb_market_systems/index.html
I have since contacted SFB Market Systems https://www.symbolmaster.com/?page=contact to get their take on the press release which shows Spooz having a relationship with SFB. http://www.spooz.com/press_details.aspx?ContentID=128
I'm now paraphrasing what was said in the conversation with the owner: Essentially, SFB initiated the contact with Spooz as SFB was interested in the Spooz Tools interface. While SFB does have an interface, the Spooz product was appealing. She indicated that the people at Spooz were very nice, but ultimately Spooz decided to back out of the agreement as Spooz was viewing the matter more on a marketing issue/advantage to be linked with SFB. I then asked about the article written shown below indicating the adoption rates and how the symbology effort was going. The response was that while SFB does have an interface and is the leading provider of information services their terminal was admittedly lacking. She then said, "I understand that Bloomberg is interested in the Spooz software program?" I indicated that this seems to be the present rumor. She then indicated that "You know Bloomberg is one of our present customers..." However, she wasn't concerned as SFB would still provide the information, but not act as a terminal provider. As far as the press release linking Spooz with SMCC, she wasn't sure why Spooz hasn't provided a clarification to the shareholders as she gets phone calls all the time from Spooz shareholders. (I guess we shareholders are becoming a rabid bunch?)
http://www.securitiesindustry.com/news/22831-1.html
Now, please bear in mind, that while there are a few terminal providers that are participating in the validation effort, Spooz is not one of them as shown in the above article. (Notice the projected adoption rate of the SFB/SMCC program of 2 %?) Financial institutions are presently deciding which terminal software to go with and are free to choose any terminal software so long as it meets the requirements of the symbology efforts undertaken http://www.optionsclearing.com/initiatives/symbology/implementation_plan.jsp http://www.optionsclearing.com/initiatives/symbology/osi_testing.jsp. To my knowledge, the Spooz software product meets and/or exceeds the proposed initiative changes, and I would be happy to be corrected otherwise if the present plain vanilla program being offered doesn't meet the changes. If the Spooz software doesn’t meet the proposed symbology changes, please point out the deficiencies.

As the symbology implementation effort unfolds, the $200 million plus US market, and worldwide market is fair game. It is important to watch the developments with the industry as the symbology effort unfolds:
http://www.fif.com/news/fifnews.php
http://www.fif.com/symbology_wg/
http://events.sifma.org/2008/289/event.aspx?id=5850 (Notice the date of this symposium?)
To be fair, the greatest setback for Spooz undoubtedly was the setback of the final implementation date of the symbology effort. The reason cited for the setback date was the market participants concerned over the transition costs to the new symbology mandate. The final implementation date has been moved from July 31, 2009 to 2010. What is important to Spooz, is that participants are free to select and implement a software terminal program that meets the Symbology effort at anytime. That would be now.

FAQ: http://www.optionsclearing.com/initiatives/symbology/faq.pdf