Looks like they might have hired a professional web developer for their website finally. much better than the $29.99 web template they've been using for the past 15 months.

they're tying into open graph protocol (FB).

PXYN had the opportunity to cash in and run after the TPS fallout. If ever there was a time to pull the curtain back, that was the moment.

Seems like Ed is really trying to pull off the impossible here.

Part of the impossible will include a buyback. A company that makes $200M a year has no excuse to not buy back shares at under 05 cents.

I think some of your assumptions may be wrong. I'm mobile this week or I'd reply in length. Suffice to say, I think your statement about the rest of revenue being factored is grossly incorrect, and I think your comments about share structure are pessimistic.

I think some correct assumptions here are:

1. PXYN inked a deal to payout a flat fee of $120M in the next 12 months. It's obvious they expect NHS to outperform TPS. Naysayers and shorts aside, we should assume revenue from NHS will be structured similar to prior agreements, i.e., after fees should be around approximately 35%, give or take 5%.

2. PfD revenue is still factored revenue, however; we still have no official perspective into this channel. I'm still of the opinion that we "have not" seen this revenue channel take off yet, and the only hint so far has been PXYNs statements that they are to take over for the TPS side of business. Others would disagree and I would again point you to the pub dates announcing those deals, which infer general start dates.

3. NextGen is "still" slowly spinning up. I'd continue to assert that this channel is a sleeper and if they can get it going, will multiply all efforts exponentially. The medical billing industry, simply put, is no joke. NextGen continues to be glossed over. I say watch this subsidiary closely.

4. Here's the thing with share structure. They can go one of two ways: 1. Expansion and reverse split. 2. Buyback and active management. Take your pick here, each option right now is a fifty/fifty, which by itself isn't the greatest ratio to place a bet on but in light of the otc market in general (I'd say most tickers are 99% r/s) I'd say there's something different here to consider. Personally I'm of the opinion there will be a buyback down the road. Why? 1. There's still too many original buyers involved. 2. There's some large investors here who aren't posting but definitely paying attention. 3. I think Ed is determined to show the world that his naysayers (including myself) have been wrong about him. There's a measure of determination here that may not be apparent to some. I'm willing to give this more time to find out where this quiet determination leads us.

I rather think it means they intend to hold the line at .01. I think you've had a good ride on the downside, but it's difficult to see this going further.

Bottom In.

interesting; they do seem to be making an effort now. I wonder if this is the new pxyn, or just another temporary phase.

that'd be considered a breech. NHS should perform exactly the level of effort required to meet terms and receive payment. there's no benefit in lose/lose scenarios.

Going to take more than a few passive-aggressive overtures' to change the initial impression from the community.

They're still just checking the box...

I have no argument with you there; although I will say that lately, PXYN PR's seem to be targeting the informed investor (to which the majority on iHub are not).

I just think Ed's afraid of getting into the trenches with us.

For one, it hedges risk in a major way, and ties the other party to performance efficiencies. NHS will have to be efficient in order to make money.

The $120M fee is indicative of better than expected, future expectations.

The full burden of risk is on NHS Pharma. They are to perform on whatever agreed to milestones/targets we're not seeing. If the agreement is executed in good faith, then this is a strong win for PXYN.

Flat Fees are a way to structure risk in a contract. Normally fixed price payments place full risk upon the party conducting the service.

There is a risk spectrum, beginning with Fixed Price contracts, and moving fully to the other side which is cost-plus-percentage-of-cost contracts (illegal in the government world, by the way, but not in the private sector).

I would initially call this a major win for PXYN; of course I didn't really see milestones or targets called out in the 3 page agreement on the 8K. I'm at work right now so I don't know if there's more to the document; I would suspect there's some sort of attachment along with the main service agreement which spells out exactly how NHS is to perform the agreed upon services.

I think PXYN bottom is .02.

I think we may dip briefly into the high .01's (.017 - .019) but the risk/reward will be evident at this price so we don't stay there long (maybe a few days).

I don't think we go below this unless Q2 shows significant weaknesses, which I don't expect.

Generally I think this is where we will trade until Ed grows a pair of balls.

I'm not sure that would help. He indicated in a round-about way that he isn't as involved as some might think.

He did have criticisms and shareholder concerns that are very similar to ours; but his perspective is long-term. He said he doesn't pay attention to daily price actions or monitor this forum (I took that last statement with a grain of salt).

thought you guys would like to see this.

did GE bite off WLAN streetlight tech? Or did WLAN just not capitalize fast enough?

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/where-to-park-ask-the-new-streetlight-of-the-future-448908867582

Those PP's who converted and sold likely did so at a loss in order to reclaim some immediate cash on hand.

The only people Ed has looked after so far are his own immediate family; enriched to the tune of almost $1M last year. I hear they attend church every Sunday...

can't argue with this, although there is reason to be optimistic.

That said, PR efforts are atrocious.

A CEO's Prime mandate in a publicly traded company is to maximize shareholder value. For that reason alone Ed should be fired and replaced. In my opinion he should be moved back to Operations where his talents can best be implemented.

This one does not look after his flock.

I think Garbino self-incriminated himself on several occasions throughout his claims document. He made it very obvious that his interest in PXYN was counter-intuitive to PXYN (as a Board Member of PXYN), and that his interest is the sole enrichment of TPS and company owners. By that document alone, PXYN should have the capability to hammer TPS as hard and fast as they would like.

That said, I doubt PXYN would ever consider pushing for criminal charges against them. Ed will settle like the nice guy he is and things will smooth over in a few months.

He's on the value side of PXYN. That was my overall takeaway.

The ability to scale now that we're away from the exclusivity of TPS is there. I hope to see further NHS's come to the table.

That said, I think the real value is NextGen. The medical billings industry is just sheer ridiculous in terms of revenue and size. If they can cash infuse this sector of business and really get this thing ramped up, the sky is the limit. NextGen is the true accelerator; but they have to get the pharma side of the house oiled and rotating before they can build this engine into anything that looks like success.

all good points; but I would take exception to a couple of them.

1. Yes, March PPO sales appear to be down; but not substantially. We have no guidance on whether March was a fluke, the new normal, or an exception to further buildup. That said: the assumption here should be that PXYN is either maintaining a consistent revenue base, or growing PPO. Any significant interruption in the NHS contract would trigger a disclosure requirement. Therefore, assume things are modestly lower, normal or growing; take your pick.

2. PfD contract: Again, PXYN may have signed the contract in January, but they didn't PR until April. This would indicate to me that we haven't yet seen the capacity PfD brings to the table. In Q2, I expect an accelerated (S) growth curve in this channel.

Lastly, on the lawsuits. Folks this is really up to your interpretation but it's clear to me that TPS did not honor the quality of billings. Therefore, much of what they are claiming, if PXYN is substantiated in court, will become irrelevant.

What I know is that words have meaning in Law; and Quality is defined in this industry as it applies to insurance billings. This IMO will be extremely difficult for TPS to argue their way out of. Especially if PXYN has any sort of historical communication in reference to the subject.

the comments are just a frame for perspective. as long as new buyers can be dissuaded from entering, low trade volume from a generally illiquid market will prevail.

You're finally starting to sound like me. What would you guys say about organizing a trip down to PXYN's headquarters? Would anyone be interested in (or available to ) take the meeting to PXYN?

Had a candid phone conversation with Shebanow.

He wasn't able to discuss (as expected) the ongoing litigation but we did converse about his personal interest and goals in PXYN. My concern was initially that he's somehow detrimental to shareholders.

I can say my short-term concerns are alleviated. I think he's a force for shareholders; he has a strong stake in PXYN and that he works on behalf of value generation. He shared many of the same opinions we have collectively underscored here on this forum. My gut feeling is that for now, he's definitely aligned with the best interests in PXYN, and that he's also impatient for change.

It was a slick move, although Ed may not have come up with the strategy himself.. Ed's one defining talent is putting in key players with the right skills. In that, he may be exceptional.

I don't think that's necessary. It would alienate many of Ed's staunchest allies and he needs them right now; don't underestimate the power of long-term loyalty. Remember he just dropkicked TPS in the face; a necessary action but it comes with risk -TPS and crew are now looking for blood and I don't believe they play fair.

IMO, look toward the latter half of this year for an initial buyback program; likely for 50 - 100M under a term of 12 or 24 months.

Also, at some point this year, PXYN will go cash flow positive. If not Q2, then in Q3. I think we see a program then, after this milestone is achieved.

I think it was a solid first quarter and met my expectations. I think if we go down further, it'll be due to lack of trading volume; and nothing to do with company fundamentals. I don't see us going further than .02's unless they dilute the SS further.

I've said this quite a number of times and I'll say it again. In order to go up significantly, we need big money involved. In order to do that, I think we needs 3 things:

1. Positive Cash Flow. PXYN is close now (excitingly close), and every quarter they narrow the margin. Gotta say, you guys know Ed isn't my favorite CEO but he's been methodically hacking away at this issue since merger. Working capital deficit is now the narrowest it's ever been and Q2 may be the Q for us here.

2. Further reduction of debt equity. As a matter of fact on this subject I don't see any debt that isn't based on equity. This needs to change. They need to secure traditional financing, and move away from leveraging their in house currency. Traditional debt instruments are the preferred method for financing growth.

3. PXYN needs to immediately get a handle on the Share Structure. We've seen a drastic reduction in conversions the last several weeks. Those who've sold have (hopefully) sold and those who're in are in. The problem with this is that big money doesn't invest on hopefully's. They invest on fundamentals and proven market trends. Until PXYN comes out with a plan to reduce Share Structure, I don't believe we will see big money enter. Minimally, we need to get back under 450M shares outstanding. Ideally, 200M shares. If they want to uplist, under 100M shares (60M is ideal).

I think we fluctuate between .02 and .05 until mid-August. In order to see further gains, PXYN needs to fix the 3 issues mentioned above.

after reading TPS's claims filing, it's clear the contract was borderline extortion. I'm not sure what they intend to gain by filing such a document.

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say the balance sheet is a mess. can you elaborate?

what I see is a balance sheet that is beginning to show signs of healthy, fiscal management. But I'm no accountant; are you referring to the shareholders equity portion of the balance sheet? why don't we have a conversation about this.

I think garbino just squeezed too hard and got greedy. The billings his sales groups generated apparently aren't all up to regulation. In that regard I think he overreached. I suspect many of his billings aren't up to snuff; i.e., the kind of billings being scrutinized by the regulators today. There's no reason why they should only be submitting 30% qualified billings. There's an untold story going on. And I wonder if Pxyn was so quick to exit the contract because maybe they don't want to be associated when things catch up with TPS.

I think I agree. Largely in part due to the anti-SLAPP motion. It's a confidence move. This is a pin the tail on the donkey action and if successful, will wipe away the majority of TPS's claims; and paint them in a corner with little recourse to turn to. Strong opening.

I think PXYN has them on the qualified billings. This was a much debated topic several months ago and I believe everyone eventually came to the same conclusion. I believe PXYN even emphasized the word Qualified in one of their PR's. Emphasis placed, likely because of the confusion at the time.

When State or Government defines a word, it takes on specific meaning other than what is commonly understood. I think because the term actually has meaning inside of regulation, PXYN has very good grounds to push their case that TPS is in breach.

After reading PXYN's list of complaints, here are my thoughts:

1. PXYN's complaint is well written, and it specifically addresses the nature of civil offenses they believe were perpetrated against them by TPS. I found TPS's document to be of lesser quality and more of a laundry list of items thrown against the wall in the hopes that something sticks.

2. Comparing the two documents; PXYN certainly has the better crafted story. Reading the TPS complaint first and then PXYNs amended filing after provides perspective. In all honesty, and perhaps my perspective is influenced because i hold PXYN shares; but after reading the two docs my impression of TPS is that this company is run by thugs.

Overall, I'm not concerned. The PXYN document seems to corroborate many of our assumptions, such as pointing out that there are active influences controlled by TPS, attempting to influence shareholder opinion. They accuse Riley of harassing and dissuading customers from doing business with PXYN as I speculated on earlier. They paint a plausible and compelling story of their concerns about Fish and the decision-making that led them to conduct business with TPS in lieu of Fish concerns; and I think they have solid contractual grounds to push for Breach and Rescission (this said, coming from a contracts background).

I invite everyone to read the two documents and form your own opinions. I've posted them to Google Docs for your review:

MESA vs TPS: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7EAgpkjyeCuV1pBZjN6YmU0Y2c/view?usp=sharing

TPS vs PXYN:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7EAgpkjyeCudmFXVUdIdzVpbUE/view?usp=sharing

Garbino strikes me as street smart and a hustler; that's not necessarily a bad thing in a businessman. My impression of the court doc is that he's severely butt-hurt that he got one-up'd by this Shebanow guy; several times from the literature and now seeks vindication in the court of law.

After reading through TPS's laundry list of complaints, a few things become clear:

1. TPS had PXYN by the balls. The pay structure had been somewhat unclear since the beginning. We knew the numbers but it wasn't clear how PXYN was supposed to pay TPS. Well now, perhaps unintentionally or as a necessity of filing in order to substantiate their claims, TPS clearly explains the pay structure. TPS takes 17.5% of Gross billings (all, whether committed or not) as a fee. PXYN was required to work with Javlin at 20% discount. What Javlin kicks back to PXYN, PXYN can attempt to bill themselves (likely the dirty of the dirty, lowest quality billings longer than 12 months). TPS takes an additional 65% of that 20% received from Javlin. Lastly, of what PXYN is able to bill in-house (the lowest quality billings returned by Javlin), TPS takes 50% of that.

IMO after reading through their filing, PXYN honored the contract, then drop-kicked them in the face as soon as was legally allowable. TPS is challenging the way they got drop-kicked in the face, on many accounts. Most of which seems groundless. Folks there's a whole lot going on here between the lines. It's my opinion that the terms of the TPS contract were extortionary, predatory, and harmful to shareholders and quite a significant conflict of interest. IMO, if PXYN hadn't done what they have done to get out of the contract, then PXYN should have been sued by shareholders and Garbino forcefully removed. TPS indicates that this Shebanow guy has threatened to do just such. There is more to the story here.

2. On the subject of payments owed, TPS likely has grounds. A deals a deal afterall; however, this is subject to context. PXYN is of course suing them for breach and rescission.

3. Who is John James Shebanow? TPS is painting this guy as the invisible Wizard behind the curtains; the puppetmaster -however, they offer no factual support. Thank you, Garbino for shedding light on this subject. I doubt it will provide you with the leverage you seek, and while this is informative, I question your motives and the agenda behind the revelation.

One thing is for sure: This Shebanow is one crafty individual. I'm on the fence on whether his intentions are good or bad for us; it's my initial opinion that while he may be aligned with our interests but I'll reserve judgement until the broader picture becomes clear. It's obvious he's embarrassed Garbino with the Preferred Series D scenario. Reading between the lines, it's clear Garbino got suckered. Whether there's enough to substantiate a return of shares, based on TPS's filing is doubtful IMO. Most of their complaint is subjective. They accuse, and they accuse often, but provide little in justification. This is likely why PXYN SLAPPED them. IMO, smart move by PXYN. PXYN will need to initially bear the burden of proof, and it's likely they never would have moved forward with the SLAPP if they didn't already feel confident about this.

Folks, I think we need to come together and find out who this Shebanow is to PXYN.

I'll read up on PXYNs amended complaint today and post my thoughts on it; then hopefully get back to the Q1 report later this weekend.

will share my opinion this weekend. still doing research.

As in any argument, the truth lies in the middle. I find Garbino's letter of resignation crafted for a specific audience. And he's outspoken about NHS. I have no data on NHS, none of us here appear to for that matter; and so whether we like the company or not we can't corroborate his statements.

What I hear, when reading through his letter, is an individual speaking to me (i.e., a Shareholder); not the Board. In that regard, I'm first and foremost suspicious because I feel I'm being told ( possibly sold) a story.

His complaints regarding NHS appear to be based more out of personal and historical angst. His dislike of NHS is clear and while the tactics he describes NHS using seem unfair from his perspective, from a neutral party they sound just competitive.

Also, Garbino is a good marketer. A Salesmen. When reading his letter, I find he hits a lot of the right emotional tones and overtures; although his grammatical skills are surprisingly lacking for his position -and I find myself reserved because of this.

PXYN has a 18 page complaint filed with Orange County, in addition to a 20 page amended complaint filed a month later. I think I'll go home and order a copy of these files before I generate an opinion.

One thing is clear -this will likely not go the full distance. They will settle.

looks like the TPS brouhaha is getting uglier:

On April 30, 2015 we amended the complaint to include actions against Ray Riley for tortious interference of contract.

remember when I said TPS would likely attempt to redirect existing WC sales away from PXYN?

who knows for sure but it's looking like a scrap...

I kind of wonder if they're required to wait until litigation with TPS is complete.

agree