Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
No "Good Sport" I don't post on Yahoo, Stocktwits or even Reddit. Many years ago did on RB and SI boards however there are more message boards around but know not like you the only alias I'm using this Loc.
If you were the CEO of this company what would you have done years ago that no CEO or director aside from CEO George H. McGovern has done.
What would you do or not do in relations to dealing with "Laurie Vennwest?"
What would you do or not do just with reading the past SEC filings but more so known what really transpired behind closed doors at HDC? Would you not be incline to do as George as done involving NEO but how did he proceed to get past the board and what were the real conversations between all of the insiders and we know of arguments within HDC not to proceed/pursue "NeoGenomic Corporation" and don't even think of messing with the huge "Intel Corporation."
We look at "Laurie Vennwest" and don't forget about "Kevin Kowbel?" ...now hold on, let's cut through the BS, what did any HDC officer or director in our past with the exception of George really do for us except lip servicing. Now don't get me wrong I'm sure we had a few pass through this company and just shake their head and moved onward as quickly as they came into HDC.
The truth to me is that George H. McGovern has been the only CEO and director that got off their a$$ to do something for this company and us shareholders...for starters George has been invested in HDC since 2007, it seem he stands up to a leak instead of sitting down....but what do I know?
What would be the reasons you would or would not want officers and directors from the past to become active in HDC?
"Canada?" ...seems to me it isn't worth trying to short HDC at these levels but makes you wonder about our past?
So maybe George will bring in 3 new directors of his "own" selection for a vote by us shareholders but under the circumstances of our share structure our vote does very little like nothing but maybe everyone would feel better and could that release enough stream from the Vennwest kettle?
So we have another settlement conference on the 10th? I wonder what else was talked about that "Laurie" is pointing at and no doubt I can't blame him with for his concerns but what is the real motive, I mean both him and Kevin Kowbel seem to have this Canadian connection in which I'm leery of and no doubt believe our CEO is too.
Sorry about that last post...no doubt a bad day for me and should have waited for Tuesday morning to post it. I hope you can figure out what in the world I was trying to say?
Zenos.... referencing 1:20-cv-03386-VMC I just pulled the minute sheet for that hearing and it is as YankeesFanInOH stated. What is interesting is the time spent in court that day 10A- 2:40PM....4 hours 40 min This to me tells me Laurie and George are keeping any personal feeling at bay.
Years ago I feel George needed to protect the company and only using employees or directors that he could trust... especially and all us shareholders know from looking at HDC crappy history with director and CEO fiascoism.
I think now since Laurie and George are somewhat force to listen to each other by way of attorney is just going through the motions and trying to understand each other a bit more. You can't blame Vennwest for wanting possible director change within HDC as we are at a point where even all typical investors are at reasonable distrust with George however, I am very grateful that George kept us from totally drowning but now.
So as I see us presently we need a CEO/CFO and a max of 3 directors. In short George, Marty and 3 new directors. ...and no we don't need any more than that until we become a real company. (if you know what I mean) Now where is the money going to come from to pay these people?
It also seems or at least a fleeing thought if George does agree to new directors as I just defined that would indicate seeing not just a 8-K but the other past filings and then share price off to the races.....or is George stalling Vennwest as long as possible.
Georges old friend Marty ...don't be surprised if you don't see him back on board in the near future but really who in heck knows what will happen at the next conference on 4/10/23 11AM.
Yes I agree we need 3 new director and it is up to George and not Vennwest nor the Judge period! That is no different then George giving Vennwest 3 names. George please do not select any past directors that were associate with HDVY before you became CEO to serve in what future we have left.
We don't actually know how many directors we still active in HDC they had to be present due to the legalities - ZOOM meeting.
Courtesy of YankeesFanInOh
Venwest Hearing on 3-22: The parties appeared before the Court for a settlement conference. The Court directed the parties to exchange a list of at least three names of potential new members to HDC's Board of Directors. the parties were also directed to exchange information regarding expanding the number of members of the Board. The Settlement conference is continued to April 10, 2021, at 11:00 A.M. Settlement Conference set for 4/10/2023 at 11:00 AM.
Loc - what's the subtext here, other than we still have a Board of Directors?
I'm willing to wait as long as it takes for them to iron out the details of a buyout. I hope that's where it's headed. I agree that it's best to keep expectations low on a buyout price
And is Vennwest doing what the rest of us are doing...waiting for Health Discovery and INTEL to make their deal so they can finally walk away with some money?
I realize this is a complicated lawsuit with a lot of interested parties - so if they are working out a deal, that it will take time to cover all the legalities. But buyouts are common on Wall Street. I would think that they should be close to announcing a deal - or if the buyout talks have failed, setting a trial date.
Nothing new in Texas Court regarding HDC/Intel...this means all Judges within the Western District, all calendars and past/present case numbers.
I agree.
5 weeks ago, our attorney asked JA if a week was sufficient to get everything hashed out for a trial date. After hearing the arguments of both sides and the subsequent decisions that have gone our way, I’d be surprised if we end up in that 5% that do go to trial. Intel knows this David and Goliath story won’t bode well with jurors.
It seems to me that Intel and George are hashing out settlement numbers and I'm sure many investors are going to be very disappointed. What ever the number is it is but hope at least .50 cent per share but a $1 dollar per share would be cool but feel that is dreaming. Now of course like many others here accepting funds converted into Intel shares would be great.
And then it surged from there, closing at .0003. It sounds better to say the stock tripled in one day, than it does to say it rose .0002 cents.
SAY WHAT??? Open @.0002 and not .0001
What in the world is going on? Do we have a settlement or possibly an update from HDC or SEC filings coming?...so much for the "expect market" not being able to show a different share price.
This is the format Vennwest & HDC must follow.......
A. FORMAT
1. The Court will use a mediation format, and private caucusing with each side; the
judge may address your client directly. The judge will not meet with parties separate from
counsule.
B. ISSUES
1. What issues (in and outside of this lawsuit) need to be resolved? What are the
strengths and weaknesses of each issue? What is your most persuasive argument?
2. What remedies are available resulting from this litigation including a trial? From
a settlement? Are there any remedies or structure of remedies available through
settlement that are not available through trial?
3. Is there any ancillary litigation pending or planned which affects case value?
What about liens?
4. Do you have enough information to value the case? If not, how are you going to
get more information before the conference?
5. Do attorney’s fees or other expenses affect settlement? Have you communicated
this to the other side?
6. Is each Defendant and/or its carrier solvent?
C. AUTHORITY
1. Are there outstanding liens? Have you verified amounts and whether they are
negotiable? Do we need to include a representative of the lien holder? If so,
contact the judge and a notice of the settlement conference will be sent.
2. Is there valid insurance coverage? In what amount? If coverage is at issue,
or the amount/type affects settlement value, have you notified the other side? Do
we need to include the representative from more than one company/carrier?
if so, notify the judge immediately.
D. NEGOTIATIONS
1. Where did your last discussion end?
2. Discuss settlement with the opposing parties before the mediation to make it
proceed more efficiently. At least one offer and response is required.
3. What value do you want to start with? Why? Have you discussed this with your
client?
4. What value do you want to end with? Why? Have you discussed this with your
client? Is it significantly different from values you have placed on this case at
other times? Does your client understand why?
5. Is there confidential information which affects case value? Why
can’t/won’t/shouldn’t it be disclosed? How can the other side be persuaded to
change value if it doesn’t have this information?
6. What happens if you don’t settle the case at the conference? What is your best
alternative to a negotiated settlement? Why? What might change the outcome of
the settlement conference? Pending motions, discovery, expert’s report, etc.
E. CLOSING
1. Have you discussed settlement formats with your client? Does the client
understand structured settlements, annuities, Rule 68 offers of judgment?
2. How soon could checks/closing documents be received?
3. If settlement is not reached, and further discovery is needed, what is your plan for
continuing settlement discussions? Do you want the Court involved in these
talks?
4. If settlement is not reached, be prepared to discuss it again at the pretrial
conference.
The following was posted on 2/26/23
As for Vennwest/HDC.......On 2/19/23 The Georgia Court has "Ordered Setting Settlement Conference" March 22, 2023 at 10AM via ZOOM.
Case 1:20-cv-03386-VMC
Court document #65 and it is 6 pages.
_______________
My personal view of any outcome on conference date are absolutely ZERO.
________________________________________________
The reason why I feel this way is from reading this document back then coupled with the personalities at hand. Also know it is fact that these conferences generally produce lip service and nothing more so a few conferences may take place later. I also don't know if George doesn't want to show his hand at this time but he must be represented by a legal team at this conference and NOPE this ZOOM meeting will not be extended to the public.
Excellent post....only a few days away....I believe both sides are dug in and not moving. That is why this event on the 22 is scheduled. In the end I think Vennwest is just keeping pressure on George until a settlement between Intel/HDC.
.... It was indicated by BQ that Vennwest would drop the lawsuit if things transpired in a positive way involving Intel. So I ask will that happen or was the just talk? Why is it that BQ stated Vennwest might/would drop the lawsuit under those conditions. I ask is BQ in direct contact with Vennwest and if so would be a god reason why George would not allow him and others back on board as directors. Just my thoughts?
Settlement conference is set for 10:30am on March 22,2023 regarding the Venwest Lawsuit per reddit post.
I checked yesterday and nothing was new involving Vennwest.
Anything new Loc with that internal law suit? Vinnwest or Quest?
Just check Texas Court system moments ago, absolutely nothing to report and also no new SEC filings yet!
If this stock was trading off the expert market the hype would be self evident. People have complained and continue to complain that they cannot trade the stock. As you've said, it's pretty odd that we haven't heard anything from anyone. Time will tell what's really happening, hopefully we're not getting desperate.
I'm really shocked that we haven't seen any results since last hearing on 2/17/23 which leaves me thinking that both sides are sincerely into settlement figures. I mean I have only been wrong or made mistakes twice in my life, 2 ex-wives : -) Now it would be cool if this works out to be at least $1 per share and if it means 28 shares of HDC stock to 1 share of Intel stock, that deal is far more than our stock has ever gained. This is far more realistic than the reads over on Yahoo.
If investors/traders in these message thread want to see a share price such as $2 -$5 dollars per share that would only happen if HDC trades again coupled with a lot of hype.
I'll take Intel stock 1 sh for every 28 that I have every day of the week and twice on Sunday. People complain about waiting the time it will take for Intel stock to climb back to $40-$50 per share...well I'm sorry but I'll gladly wait like others since many of us have been here since May of 2003.
Well stated. If the system is fair then HDVY should be getting multi billion settlement including ongoing royalties which opens the door to the company continuing into the future and / or going after other infringers. That would mean several dollars per share payout to shareholders probably as a special dividend which would be nice since they are taxed at a lower rate. If I were Intel I would acquire HDVY to avoid paying royalties and then go after the other infringers with my extensive legal resources. Seems like the smart thing to do.
Dig and Loc
I think we can agree that we just don’t know the ultimate share structure, expenses (33% legal contingency seems to be the standard) and most importantly, damages.
Share count and expenses are more easily knowable, but we have no idea of the damages. We can only infer from other, totally unrelated cases. Is it based on actual monetary damages – HDC’s loss of revenue from an Intel licensing agreement and/or a portion of revenue gained from our technology? Or, the arbitrary settlement range of Intel’s prior pay-outs?
The settlements guesses I’ve heard so far, has been based on the latter. But no one on these message boards, or anywhere else I know of, has been able to flesh out to what extent HDC was hurt financially from this infringement.
FROM THE ORIGINAL CASETEXT: >>>HDC accuses Intel of infringing its patents directly and indirectly through, for example, the use, sale, and marketing of “Intel AI-optimizing/machine learning processors, ” field programmable gate arrays, system on chips, and software deployed on “Intel/Intel-partnered computers” and other architectures. ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 51, 74, 78.<<<
Dang! Not sure what it means, but impressive, nonetheless. Maybe I should be embarrassed, but I don’t know what part of our technology is in Intel’s chips. Was HDC integral and essential for intel’s chip and “deployed software?”
To quote Mr. Lasso, “I’m between an Elephant and a Rhino (Elephino).”
Intel’s yearly revenue has been 60-70 billion. I know we’ve had this spat w/Intel for over 10 years. How far back do we go in damages? 10 years of 600-700 billion? What % of this (potentially) multi-year revenue is infringement? How do you monetize our contribution to the sale of Intel’s chips and software?
Elephino. We need a computer scientist or any techy to weigh in.
Unless any of us know how to calculate these damages, we’re momentarily stuck between the worlds of Allen’s aforementioned perfunctory 250K per-patent pay-out, and the multi-billion Holy Grail of infringement settlements.
If one plays in these message threads expect anything and yes everyone has an opinion. Even "Sir John" with 10 shares of HDC being worth 1 shares of Intel stock @$27.00.... yes it gets embarrassing but at least some are posting their opinions.
...I wonder in a settlement maybe George would not be able to do anything with those options since we are in the expect market? Could he still wheel and deal the warrants?
Loc .. you are right its embarrassing how little you "know" at this point ... Based on how closely you follow and report here ..
you should know there are ALREADY more than 600 Mill shares after all warrants and options are converted or exercised..
Still dont know how many more of the 900 mill shares available will be used for the final financing which is obviously needed ..
Also it has been discussed here that Attorney fees are paid by the loser ..
You do have one thing right ..
Tempered expectations of possible $$ coming in and no chance of a future after litigation ..
Zenos...I really don't know what I'm talking about but I figure (and please add to this posts) that at the most we could obtain $500M settlement from Intel at TOPS!!! Just tossing numbers next I figure 500M shares diluted to be safe and next our legal team will easily swallow 40 to 60 percent of the $500M. Let us say $500M net bottom line awarded next deduct 50% of the $500M settlement and you end up with $250M to be paid out to 500Million shares which in my mind mean .50 cent per shares at most.
I need thought from you and others on how others see this possible payout.
This is why it is so important that George files back SEC filings. If he does so I think hype may drive this stock into the dollar figure but without hype do to traders and people who want to make a fast buck we are stuck simply because (and you know too) that HDC could have $900 million (bullets) sitting in a bank but but no gun nor anyone with what it takes to move this tired company out of the rocking chair again we are simply done after this lawsuit with Intel zero bullets and no portfolio holster to put the gun or bullets in just an old can of gun cleaner that probably isn't worth the effort?
I sincerely thank George for hanging in here for so damn long although this company venture has probably taken a toll on his entire family.
Still as of right "now" no new publicly accessible document from Texas Court nor new calendar date
Texas Court Document - Prepared waiting on public release....I hope this is a good Friday as I indicated over a week ago.
>>> pay out .20-.50 per share at max.<<<
Hey Loc – I agree there’s some irrational exuberance across these message boards, so I don’t think you’re necessarily off the mark. But can you “reverse engineer” that PPS range? The components being share count, settlement amount ($) and expense deductions. I would hope Vennwest settles end of the month.
Also, I’d be shocked if this starts trading again – or at least any time prior to a settlement, although I’d love to see it.
Hello King......it is beyond me that some in these message boards think that after we deal with this Intel lawsuit involving Intel that we may move forward with a business and or pursue more infringers. I can assure everyone that will never ever happen. Why can't people see the mind set and actions involve George just for starters? Age and health and what is remaining in his family life. Then we have the management team? How about our patent portfolio....what did I just say about our patents? Now what legal action or documents has George sent out to other infringers? What have we heard within real documentations that actually parallel like HDC has written documentations with consistency as we did with Intel before we filed the lawsuit against them.
Now with patent life it pretty much fades into the sunset within the last 1-2 years of life, at least that is what I gather from my readings so royalties moving forward if at all are bubble gum monies.
This present lawsuit with Intel I doubt will kick up into a high level of trading share price unless we public trading starts again. I figure settlement if that happens will pay out .20-.50 per share at max. It seems investors just don't understand the probable payout to our Lawyers and are forgetting about Vennwest who has been knocking on Georges front door. It seems simple to me when you look at a management team and experience? Don't get me wrong George has fought everyone including his own close friends to try and keep this going forward and yes many reasons but still he must be extremely tired. I tend to believe that Intel's option to settle with HDC would not be a buyout since Vennwest is in the picture.
The amount of time required to reach conclusion is simply mind blowing. Many of us could be dead by the time they resolve this.
Intel and HDC must come to an agreement on any issues they have (no doubt discovery time) then resolve any other issues (hopefully as JA expressed) by themselves first then approach the Judges Clerks to resolve further issues or help if need be....however, JA did say he would help them but preferred not to... that they should work out details before Trial date is set.
The only way Intel can stall at this point is to request JA's help and he indicated he preferred not to so that is sending a message down Intel's throat. I doubt Intel is stalling more about the details as to discovery time but it seems to me since JA did not deal with the two case numbers that that might be throwing a wrench into the timing events and is why I think (as said prior) that we will hear something from the Court by this Friday referencing the case numbers and who knows maybe the initial calendar of future events leading to Trial.
As for Trial itself? there will probably be 2-4 Pre Trial Conference hearing before the seat gets smoking hot so still early days.
Lefty....don't even think that as Judge Albright will indeed pick the court date, sincerely
I don’t know why the judge doesn’t just pick it for them.
Looks like Intel is delaying again. They can’t seem to pick a trial date.
Zenos...you know Intel and HDC have a slight issue with discovery time due to two possible case numbers and is why I strongly feel JA should have made his decision back on 2/17 about the two case numbers. That to me should define discovery time however, I'm totally convinced that JA will permit HDC to use case 6:20-cv-00666 and furthermore the Judge seems to be smiling and telling each side I'll see you in my court soon.
Just checked Judge Albrights Calendar again, I believe we will see some court documentations between tomorrow but before 3-10-23. His calendar is prime time and calling our name.
Thanks Loc!
At the end of the hearing two weeks ago, Albright wanted the two lawyers to work together and come up with a schedule based on everything that needed to be done – without Albright’s help.
And then, a trial date can be set.
Albright asked if there was still time left in the fact discovery, and Bill (our lawyer) said a little bit and then asked if he wanted that by the end of the week. Albright reiterated it was up two the two sides to make that schedule as well.
All this was almost two weeks ago. Discovery is probably complete (?) and we should have a trial date shortly. Was that your take? I’ve recorded the hearing, so much of this was verbatim.
Just now checked Texas Court System and nothing new yet!
It would seem to me, yet I really have no clue that if HDC is able to file due filings that even though some type of settlement is or might happen I would think if the share price rises to .10 .20 .30 .40 or higher the company worth and settlement would be higher than if the parties are wheeling and dealing now but that is just my thought?
Sure would be nice to hear the present conversations between these player and their attorneys.
Tcld55....I'm going to be busy today but will somewhat respond now....I can pretty much assure you that George wants to get all this over as quickly as possible.
Reference other infringers....sure I'm sure there are more but feel George is done chasing Infringers but actually I'm sure. When you look at everything involving the company I mean everything I can see HDC is done messing with lawsuits after this Intel case.
I don't have a clue if Intel will buy HDC but believe they won't. I haven't a clue on what our attorney's will or will not due either but there will be a breaking point to end this one way or another.
Great if we ended up with .50 at min but would of course enjoy a solid $1 dollar bill per share.
If we don't trade again we are at the mercy of what every transpires from this case but if George files SEC documents then we have a greater chance since hype will move this stock way up within this trial if that happens. Possibly if HDC files back paperwork with the SEC information within may cause harm but that is my thought after readying Marty's resignation letter and of course trying to read between the lines of what pressures are being pressed from Vennwest Global.
I know you feel HDC might go after other infringers and of course several others feel that way too but my dollar says clearly that after Intel we are done period. Could you imagine what has been happening within the McGovern Family referencing HDC.
Settlement with Intel? I think we need to figure out what percent of the patent patents are involved in what percent of Intel's product or products and of course date in which our claim will be accepted. Will it be from the first day emails were sent to Intel or perhaps from our 2020 lawsuit filing in Texas. Also (which I doubt) will Judge Albright only allow the damages from 2022 in which would seem to be extremely unfair.
So for now our best shot (for us longs/traders) is if HDC files back SEC filings so the hype can start and traders send this stock flying. It would be nice if George felt this way too but I doubt that very much but I'm sure he wants to be done with this. If you read past documentations George stated that if it weren't for Marty, George stated he would not have taken on as CEO
Locwolf,
I agree with you completely on George. If it weren't for him, the share price would be less than it is now. My question concerning the lawsuit was more about the share count when it is over.
A settlement with Intel is not dependent on this lawsuit being settled , but I imagine a buyout would be.
i have been trying to read between the lines on BQ s e-mails on Yahoo and what little information I can gather elsewhere. I first thought that George would be inclined to look at a buyout after the infringement suit was over and be done with it. I am not sure of that strategy now. Depending on how large or small the Intel settlement is, there is still something left on the table with the other infringers. A buyout would have to include an estimate of what is still there.
i agree with you on getting off the expert market. Small investors such as ourselves, will be better served, (my opinion) if the stock is allowed to trade. The market can determine the value of the company. i certainly cannot
King Oil...look at post 17190 it is from December 6th 2019
As for Marty that is an old 8k filing ...dated 6/22/2022................
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141788/000168316822004508/health_ex9901.htm
I still haven't given up on Marty's return?????
And why did Marty leave? So many unanswered questions
So what happened? Did they run out of money again.
‘Until recently, we have lacked the funds necessary to update our financial statements and to update our filings with the SEC. We have developed a plan with our accountants and attorneys to update our financial statements and bring our SEC filings current.’
...to work for the Company for a salary that has been accrued and unpaid to date. In effect, I have provided the financing for my own compensation. Furthermore, the funding that was provided by myself and a partner was on terms and conditions far more beneficial to the Company than any other sources of capital if they had existed. The Company had no financial statements, was effectively insolvent and its only prospects were two highly uncertain legal proceedings.
A critical element of our plan was to put in place a leadership team of accomplished professionals whose only motivation was the preservation and improvement to shareholder value. The keystone of this team was Marty Delmonte who was a loyal employee for many years. I personally would never have considered assuming my role and making my investment in time and money if Marty had not agreed to stay. The team’s only goal is to preserve, protect and enhance shareholder value by making the Company a success. I am proud of this leadership team and value each member tremendously. We have worked countless hours against great odds to get to where we are today.
Thanks to the hard work of the current team, we have been successful in executing the plan to save the Company. Specifically, we were successful in the Arbitration proceeding and enforcing our rights with the NeoGenomics MLA in April of this year. This important win provided the obvious financial benefit to enable us to continue to operate and, equally important, confirmed our exclusive and unfettered rights to our technology which had been encumbered by the MLA.
In addition, we were successful at the USPTO in our Interference Proceeding with Intel. The importance of the Interference Proceeding was that, while there was no immediate financial benefit, it confirmed that HDC is the sole owner of the valuable SVM-RFE Patent. Importantly, the term of the patent has been extended to June 2025. Consequently, if we are able to identify and successfully prosecute any infringement by any third party, the damage period could be as much as twelve years. Potentially more importantly, we have five additional years to develop our patent and to generate possible licensing revenue.
In reference to the Interference Proceeding win, it is important to note the difference between interference and infringement. Interference establishes the ownership of a patent in the case of an ownership dispute as a result of the filing of identical or similar patent applications. HDC won the Interference and now has exclusive ownership of the SVM-RFE patent. Infringement is the unauthorized use of another party’s patent. In that case, the onus is on the patent owner to prove that the infringer is actually using the patent. Patent infringement litigation is both complex and expensive. We believe that a third party or parties are infringing one or more of our patents. Since before the win at the USPTO we have been working closely with special counsel to evaluate and plan the best legal course of action for this matter. We have also been in discussions with certain entities concerning the financing of such potential actions. Although no agreements have been reached, we are pleased and encouraged by the progress made to date. As developments occur in these matters, we will communicate with shareholders as and when appropriate.
With regard to future development opportunities, we have been in discussions to identify areas of collaboration with a medical and bioinformatics research institution. The specific areas under discussion include image processing and analysis, flow cytometry, cytogenetics, uses of SVM-RFE in medical research and prostate cancer. If successful, this collaboration could help open new areas of commercial development for our Company. Although these discussions are highly promising and continuing, we cannot be sure of success.
Until recently, we have lacked the funds necessary to update our financial statements and to update our filings with the SEC. We have developed a plan with our accountants and attorneys to update our financial statements and bring our SEC filings current. We intend to file a 10-K for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 in the first quarter of 2020.
Once the above filings have been made, we will be able to have a Shareholder’s Meeting no later than June 30, 2020. The time and place of the meeting will be announced when appropriate and will most likely be held sooner than that estimated date. Of note is that this will be only the third such meeting in the past ten years. Contrary to the practice of previous leadership, we intend to conduct these meetings on a regular basis in the future.
Many shareholders have directed comments and questions to the Company. All of these communications have been reviewed and dealt with as appropriate. For the convenience of all shareholders, we request that all shareholder inquiries or comments be directed to the Company via the following email address: investor@healthdiscoverycorp.com. We will continue to read and respond appropriately to all shareholder comments and inquiries as we have in the past.
In summary, we are pleased with what we have accomplished to date. We have overcome incredible odds to get to this point today. To put in perspective, one year ago we were heading into almost two weeks of arbitration hearings against NeoGenomics. Despite the internal and external challenges, we have persevered through both internal and external obstacles to literally save the Company and give it hope for a better future. We fought, and will continue to fight on, for the simple reasons that carries this team: the belief in the HDC technology and the desire to fight for every HDC shareholder. It has served this current HDC team and will continue to in the future.
Thank you for your continued support and we look forward to speaking with you soon.
Respectfully,
/s/ George H. McGovern, III
George H. McGovern, III
Chairman & CEO
...and don't forget who actually fought for all of us.......and who didn't!
December 6, 2019
Dear Fellow Shareholders:
This is the first time that I have been able to communicate with you by a shareholder letter since I became Chairman and CEO of our company, Health Discovery Corporation (“HDC” or the “Company”). For those that I have not had the privilege of speaking with since my involvement with the Company, I would like to give you a little bit of history. I joined HDC’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) on May 17, 2016 and was appointed Chairman and CEO on February 24, 2017. Like many of you, I had been a shareholder for many years, long before joining the Board. I became a shareholder because I believed in the promise of HDC’s technology. I had hoped, like many of you, that the NeoGenomics Master License Agreement (the “Agreement” or “MLA”) would result in the successful development and commercialization of HDC’s technology as promised. After several years of no results and no royalties I became concerned that something was wrong. My concerns were based on my review of the MLA between our Company and NeoGenomics.
The first nine months of my tenure on the Board were very contentious. I advocated an aggressive strategy with NeoGenomics to enforce our rights under the MLA. I was vehemently opposed by the other members of the Board and the CEO. The dispute, both internally and externally, ultimately culminated in our filing of the Demand for Arbitration (“Arbitration”) against NeoGenomics in October 2017.
Fortunately, over several months the other directors and the previous CEO who had failed to enforce HDC’s rights against NeoGenomics all resigned. Unfortunately, by that time the Company was left with no funds to pursue any of the following: continuance of daily operations; prosecution of the Arbitration proceeding against NeoGenomics; prosecution of the Interference Proceeding against Intel at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”); and the ability to pay the required maintenance fees on our patent portfolio. In short, the Company was insolvent and effectively bankrupt. There were several entities that we believe were anticipating just such a development, which would have enabled them to acquire our technology for little to no value out of bankruptcy.
Since April 2017, we have focused on the survival and future of the Company. While we had serious disagreements with the actions of prior management, we have tried to focus on the future and to at least temporarily ignore the past. Nevertheless, as appropriate we intend to always take whatever action that we deem appropriate and in the best interests of the Company.
Upon my appointment as CEO on February 24, 2017, our first task was to develop a strategic plan to try to save the Company. The key elements of our plan were to aggressively pursue the Arbitration proceeding against NeoGenomics; to pursue the Interference Proceeding at the USPTO against Intel; to take the necessary steps to protect our patent portfolio from infringement by others; and, if the Company could survive, to take steps to develop our technology on our own or with others.
The critical obstacle to pursuing any of these efforts was lack of funds. We searched for funding from many sources. We asked if other directors and previous investors would consider providing funds for the Company and the answer was a firm no. In short, there were no sources of funds for the Company. As a result, I developed a plan to provide financing personally along with a co-investor. In addition, I agree
MBMoney...sure wish you would post here again.
I gather that too but Vennwest is saying that George won't accept better loan terms. Possibly Vennwest to loan money to HDC at a better rate. Now that statement is just to give you an idea "only" and yes warrants due to series "D" shares....but how can George buy warrants when we are on the expert market, he can't or can he?
Yes quickest way out is to settle with Intel but will they with Vennwest needling George? I recall past directors that still have millions of shares in HDC stating he wanted to just sell the company/technologies. Yes you know who I'm talking about and it seems he might have been tied to the hip with Vennwest and possibly our old CEO "Kevin". So if you were George and he was involved in HDC starting in 2007 and have watched some of these past insiders - directors wheel and deal why would you "if you were George" deal with them or allow them to be on the BOD.
We need to be able to trade again in order for the best share price to buy and sell, PERIOD!
I dislike those "D" shares and have voiced my personal thoughts on that but HDC is still breathing and is because of George H. McGovern III and NOT past directors or Vennwest.
.....Oh didn't BQ state Vennwest would back off of the lawsuit if the USPTO favored HDC involving those patents? Now to really top that off HDC has cleared the football field and made another touch down as it looks like we are headed to trial with Intel yet it seems to me BQ is totally wrong again.
Your thoughts and others too????
Locwolf,
Refresh my memory. Isn't this lawsuit over the warrants George and the board issued? I thought they were supposed to go to arbitration.
I was thinking you estimated if everything is converted the share count would be closer to 800 million than 400 million. Is that correct or is just because I am old and my imagination is working overtime?
As for Vennwest/HDC.......On 2/19/23 The Georgia Court has "Ordered Setting Settlement Conference" March 22, 2023 at 10AM via ZOOM.
Case 1:20-cv-03386-VMC
Court document #65 and it is 6 pages.
_______________
My personal view of any outcome on conference date are absolutely ZERO.
I have also wondered how this will play out. My guess has been the settlement could be a buyout which means they may not be concerned about the stock trading again. There would be one final audit and the stock holders would get X amount per share.
Then again, Intel is not the only infringer. They may get it back to trading and continue after some of the big names on the list.
It is all speculation at this point. I will am interested in the amount HDC will ask for or thinks they should get. Remember the cascading element in the initial filings. i would think some of the other companies on the list would be hoping for a buyout to get them off the hook.
LocWolf,
Thanks for all you do to keep us updated. I agree that the time is right to submit the filings and to get trading started again.
I don't know how much HDVY might win, but the company isn't a going concern. I've never owned a stock in this situation, so this is just my assumption how it will play out. If there's an award, then the company will give the attorneys their cut, pay the outstanding bills, and then do a final cash distribution (of what's left) to the shareholders and close the door permanently.
Followers
|
130
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
18304
|
Created
|
10/08/05
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |