Maybe yes, maybe no Sirius. I recommend you dig deeper with your research to see what may really be there. Some of my thoughts:

- The VSL technology is in everything Android, and apparantly has been since late 2010. It is also the foundation of Youtube's video quality, a major problem for GOOG before they stole the technology. There are countless other GOOG products using the video codec as well.

- GOOG themselves published a value on the the Engineered Architecture revenues at $120 billion annually (which seems ridiculously high, but the nature of the software is unique and global.) Let's say they anticipate a 10% net profit, that's $12 billion, which could give a guestimated market cap value of $132 billion.

- This is a case that is prime for strong punitive damages! I believe GOOG is revealed as a thug by their actions.

I did say $5 billion is my fantasy, and a man can dream. :)

You are correct in the legal delay strategy that commonly occurs in the US. That strategy is not allowed in Germany; the GOOG and NFLX cases there get a one day trial in December, after which the German judge rules within a few weeks.

MAXD's law firms took the US cases on a contingency, which says volumes about the law firm's confidence.

Don't take my word for these things, check it out yourself. It's a lot to consider and digest, but research will make for a better decision on the stock.

On March 4, 2015 Max Sound Corporation (the “Company”) and controlling shareholder Hong Kong Opportunities LLC, a Florida limited liability company (“HKO”), entered into a Securities Exchange Agreement whereby HKO agreed to exchange one hundred and twenty million (120,000,000) shares of the Company’s common stock for 5,000,000 shares of the Company’s series A convertible preferred stock.

I read this as 120 million shares common stock being converted to 5 million shares preferred stock, or 120 million shares removed from the common stock, and 5 million shares added as "A" stock. Note the value placed on the preferred stock. To me that's also a reverse split, but that may not be the correct specific term for this transaction.

The outstanding MAXD shares are now listed at 330 million; I recall they had been around 390 million at one point.

Here is the link to the 8-K filing of preferred stock:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1353499/000135349915000004/eightkpreferredshares.htm

Akiaki, I'll try to offer some ideas on estimating a number. This is a bit of a WAG (Wild Assumed Guess) I'm presenting, but it might help you to do your own estimate.

First, GOOG was in deep trouble in 2010 because of it's poor video performance with YouTube and other products. Their miraculous improvement (mysteriously at the same time they were working with VSL) was a major part of pumping up their revenues and stock value every year since. I think it's something like five times the value now. While there were other factors involved in GOOG's growth, I think the impact could have been over a $ billion, plus whatever license fees they've pulled in since.

The Engineered Architecture side is potentially more significant. For whatever reason, GOOG's own people estimated a value of the technology at $120 BILLION ANNUALLY. I don't know if their coffee had been spiked that day, but I can see how there would be a significant income potential as a result of the intial software purchase, tied to annual license use fees and recurring updates revenues.

MAXD gets only a portion of any settlement; the legal firms and the founders of VSL and Engineered Architecture get a share. I know the share amounts are on the MAXD 10-Q reports somewhere, and you can look that up. Here, for the sake of convenience, I'm going to split any award as one third legal firms, one third VSL/EA, and one third MAXD.

I'll use a $1 billion dollar settlement/award as a base. That would give MAXD $333 million. Let's give $33 million to zero MAXD debt. The remaining $300 million would give MAXD a cash value(PRE-TAX) of $0.75 per share (based on 400 million shares. Keep in mind the recent preferred share conversion reverse split of 9-1 skewed the total shares number, but assuming a pre reverse split volume, it was getting close to 400 million, so that's why I use this number.) The $0.75 value would be just for the settlement result, and would not include the core MAXD technology sales and growth potential. The share value on the market could actually be higher.

So that's kind of a way to guesstimate a number. A $3 billion settlement would be around $2.25 share value, a $333 million settlement would be around $0.25 share value, etc.

Also, something I think worth noting; the recent preferred share conversion was odd. The only purpose I see in it is that it provides the holders of those preferred shares as much as 70% of dividends tax free. That's obviously huge, and I don't know where the loophole comes from, but it is real. Given that, I can see a motivation to immediately distribute a dividend from any settlement proceeds. Any dividends must be issued to all shareholders; preferred holders can not limit dividends to themselves. My point here is that there may be an immediate dividend opportunity for investors. This is something better reviewed by an expert on preferred shares, but I wanted to make you aware of it.

My personal fantasy is that GOOG will just flat out purchase the MAXD technology and the lawsuits for, say, $5 billion. Then I can cash out and move on. Who knows?

Any other thoughts on a settlement value are welcome; please post if you have any.

Quantum, there may be an opportunity here for you and all MAXD investors. As you appear to be close to management, and seem to have successful experience beyond marketing and promotion, perhaps you can work with them to improve their performance?

Let's face it, major investors, the ones who can provide the buying power to really get MAXD rolling, will research MAXD deeply if a Google settlement or major sale comes (which is to say, if something arrives big enough to make MAXD come up on their radar.) I will argue that if you look at existing MAXD/SOAN performance over the years, it presents a strong case for poor management. At best, it encourages extreme caution in evaluating the potential opportunity for MAXD success. In my case, it's bad enough that I would like to see new management (again, I'm not saying existing management needs to step down, they can remain in their strength of marketing and finance, just turn over general management and operations to better qualified leadership.)

Many MAXD investors out there seem to be starved for information, and get frustrated when MAXD goes silent, with only an occasional insignificant press release (IMHO.) You could help MAXD's management to understand the importance of strong investor relations. In that, I mean all investors, not just potential new ones. All shareholders of MAXD want to feel that MAXD is willing to support them, like they support MAXD. I don't feel MAXD management is a good communicator, and I believe it to be one of their weaknesses.

MAXD management is likely aware that you support them, and may be open to your suggestions. As you know from business experience, fragile egos often reject any offered opinions or ideas that don't agree with their's, particularly if they feel it is a challenge to their leadership. They probably would value your opinions, knowing you are behind them.

Your thought's?

I think the short answer is 64...as in $64 billion in cash reserves that Google has available. They can fight a very intimidating legal war, and have already done so on many occasions. US Civil Court cases are, in truth, a matter of who has the most to pay the legal fees, and how long they can financially support the legal process.

Google steals, and steals a lot. They prey on the weak, which I will define as small companies or individuals with inventions that they do not have resources to move forward. Google offers to help, then steals.

Google does not want their unethical practices exposed. However, only other major companies (Apple, Microsoft, Samsung) have prevailed against them, and they likely expected to quickly dispatch MAXD. As weak as MAXD looks on paper, Google likely never even considered settlement.

The cases in Germany have changed that. In the USA, Google's attornies can easily push a case out for five years or more as part of their forcing plaintiffs to give up the fight. They do not have that option in Germany, so that has likely forced them to take the MAXD case seriously. Most importantly, Google screwed up and exposed their theft, left plenty of evidence confirming it was a theft, and they know they can't win if they go to trial.

I am confident Google withheld any settlement discussion while waiting to see if MAXD could come up with the money to finance the legal case in Germany (Germany does not allow legal firms to work on contingencies.) MAXD only recently confirmed that they have done so.

Google now may be finally ready to entertain a settlement. I believe it is the best business decision for them. In a typical Google settlement, they will require confidentiality to a degree that the causes for the lawsuit "disappear". All parties associated with the lawsuit will agree to deny any discussion of what happened before, during, and after the lawsuit. It will simply cease to exist. With that, Google can sweep the events under the rug, and ideally prevent other victims of Google from taking action against them. A settlement can include an aquisition or exclusive license of of the technology that is imbedded in Google products, and drawing revenues from license fees. This will prevent the people supplied by Google from being forced to pay license fees to MAXD, which would expose Google's theft.

With that said, the opposition to settle quickly may come from, (1) Google's legal firms wanting to milk the litigation for long term revenues, and won't encourage settlement, (2)Google's principal's may take this case personally and seek to punish MAXD somehow through abuse of the legal system, (3)Google may feel the German case can be lost with only minimal impact, and the USA and possible global actions can be stalled or defeated (Google is attempting to change patent laws to allow them to get away with their thefts, having infiltrated the US patent office and gained favored status in the White House and Congress through campaign donations,) (4)Google may feel settling this case might open doors to more lawsuits from other victims, so it's defeat would be considered to have a needed benefit for them.

I'm sure there's more possibilities. Let's hope Google is aware of the potential risks of their theft's public exposure, that they're open to settlement and/or acquisition, and that MAXD and they can come to an agreement on an amount quickly.

I'm impressed that the MAXD legal firms were confident that no prior art existed with Google, even before they took the case on a contingency. Seeing that Google had filed for patents on the technology (I don't believe they mentioned taking VSL's IPR and claiming it as their own in their filing), that might be cause for concern, but I guess not in this case. The Post-It's are no doubt irrelevent, and all the interest from different groups when they were revealed I must have misunderstood. I guess they must have been saying "this means nothing."

For all our sakes, I hope the MAXD legal team's surprising insight into Google's design team docs will pay off. Google still has time to file prior art, or any other potential claim of the technology. Let's hope they fail to do so, making for an easy decision for the German court.

I did not realize that my statement of no revenues yet generated was untrue. Can you update the revenues MAXD has generated at this point?

I have brought new technology to the market, and know of the challenges. But I think five years of operation without revenue is plenty of slack. I guess I'm just not as understanding as you. That's ok, though. We don't have to agree on that.

We all hope the glitches are easy fixes. My own experience is that it isn't a guarantee, and the fixes can even discover new problems. Once the final product is completed, there is a ramp up time for actual production. Time from completed design to on the shelf ready to sell can be months. So let's all hope it gets done promptly, but we don't know for sure, and it's in the hands of MAXD's customers. New customers need to be pursued continually.

So, Qualcomm is a relationship. Great! Before, I thought Qualcomm was a customer that had not generated any sales. Now, I know that they're a relationship that has not generated any sales. That changes everything for me, and should clarify things for other investors as well!

We can differ in our investing strategy; my intent is to get a return and make money, and I expect the information I am provided in choosing where to invest to be reasonabbly reliable. You may choose to be a sympathetic and supportive voice regardless of the stock and company performance, ready to lose your money, satisfied that the management gave what you believe to be a good effort. Both are ok.

As I've said before, I hope management hits on a huge success, and makes me look bad. Close some of these contracts, get more orders, turn in revenues, win a big cash settlement, drive the stock value way up, and rub my face in it!!! I would love that. Let's hope they don't screw up the chance to show everyone how much I misunderstood them.

Just a note on the core business; one of the original hopes for MAXD was that it would become comparable to Dolby. It would seem to be a reasonable comparison, as the technology can be deployed in much the same way as Dolby products.

In fact, stop and think of where you could apply the MAXD technology. Almost anything using sound can benefit. The market potential is HUGE.

Dolby currently has a market cap of $3.2 billion, which would equate to about $9.00 - $10.00 a share for MAXD.

I do believe MAXD's core business has a very high potential, if the company finds the leadership to secure it. I fear it's been pushed aside somewhat, in light of the Googliath suit. Perhaps MAXD is dependent on a strong settlement to finance future growth, so it justifies the prority given to the lawsuits.

To your points, I will say:

- The Post-It notes are critical. No known prior art is the current condition, but without the Post-Its, Google likely would have generated a false prior art to create the impression that the VSL development was just coincidental to their own. This is a common strategy out there today. The Post-Its eliminated that option for Google, clearly confirming that Google did not have a similar technology in development at the time, and that they clearly copied the VSL design to be thier own. It's all good for MAXD.

- I certainly don't think the founders are unaware of the VSL suit; they were sued by MAXD, and that makes MAXD a bad guy in their eyes, for any and every action MAXD brings against Google. We all hope that Google can not influence Germany, and at this time that would appear to be true. As for the US, civil courts are big business, and justice is a by product of financial strength. Google has three former employees in the US Patent office, including the top dog, and Megyn Smith in the White House. The US Patent office infiltration is clearly to change US Patent Law in their favor, preventing them from being accountable to thefts of technology. They're not doing it for the good of the public! Google is the #2 Democratic Party financial supporter, and I'm sure that's why Megyn Smith in the White House. If you're familiar with large case civil litigation, you'll know the law can be twisted any direction, and abused dozens of ways. It should not be that way, but it's what it has become. MAXD has a very strong case, and a strong legal team, and this is why I think it is Google's best business decision to settle the case or aquire the technologies. But there's no guarantee that Google will see it as I do; they may take an arrogant approach, and might argue that MAXD needs to be crushed to send a message to all who would try to sue them. I am hoping for a quick settlement, but experience tells me that there is no guarantee until it actually happens. And that's all I'm saying; reason argues that it looks good, but is not a sure thing until it happens.

- MAXD has indicated they are moving their business forward, but they have NO generated revenues as yet, and none of the products expected to bring that revenue are in production yet. There is no guarantee any bugs will be a quick and easy fix. My definition of them moving forward is actual revenues(substantial) in the bank. MAXD's expression of optimism will not increase stock value or pay out dividends.

- I believe that my investment deserves a reward; that's why I invest. It is up to me to do due diligence to the realistic expectation of seeing that reward. Let me ask you this Quantum; do you believe an investor should just throw money at anything, hoping for a reward but not feeling they have any right to it? How about an employee; if they work (an investment of their time), do they do so with the belief that they may or may not get paid, and the not getting paid is acceptable? Yes, investing is a risk, as is almost anything. But there are expectations, and "implied" promises of success, that secure their investment to a particular entity. Could you see a court telling victims of a Ponzi scheme that they don't deserve anything...tough luck Jack! There certainly would be no need for a legal process to assit investors in recovering their investment. Maybe I'm a little unrealistic to think that a company should perform as they imply, or to expect them to be truthful with the information they present. Call me crazy that way, and I'll happily continue to pyschologically suffer for it!

I think MAXD refiled immediately after the dismissal, perhaps even prior to it, and that the new case is sealed from the public.

The reason I say this is because Google's request for dismissal of a/the case was turned down by the judge shortly after MAXD's dismissal, indicating that some form of a VSL/MAXD case still exists. It's just a guess, and it would be good to get clarity from MAXD.

This management did not get the injunction...what they did do, to their credit, was hire top legal teams. The legal teams took this on a contingency....courtesy of Google's Post-It notes evidence that Google mistakingly put in VSL's hands.

That's good, but it doesn't mean management suddenly got their act together. To be honest, I'm hoping they leave the legal teams to do their thing, and win a favorable result for MAXD. I have seen individual egos that struggled with anyone else getting credit for a success, and interfered to try to claim the glory...only to screw everything up. I'm reasonably confident current MAXD management isn't stupid enough to mess this up, but if the ego's get too inflated, nothing is out of the relm of possibility.

There really is no guarantee of success in the lawsuit, despite what I believe to be a very strong case. I think there is a very high probability of some type of settlement, and I truly believe the right financial decision (most profitable, lowest risk of loss) for Google is a quick settlement. Unfortunately, this lawsuit directly involves the company founders, Larry and Sergi, and the current White House "Chief Technology Officer", Megyn Smith, whom I believe to still have unofficial ties with Google. They may want to crush MAXD to send a message, or just to feed their own egos. Their political connections can influence any legal decisions, at least in the USA. Google has succeeded in sealing the documents, which is to hide future legal activity from the public.

So their still remains much risk. That risk would be less intimidating if MAXD management were successful in moving their core technology forward. That's the one thing they can control, and they can leave the legal to the lawyers. Based on current management's performance so far, I personally would prefer to see new management in control. Existing management doesn't need to leave, they just need to restrict themselves to thier skill set, which is marketing and promotion.

From a new investor standpoint, there's nothing wrong with hoping for a big gain purely on the lawsuit. But long term investors, who have committed their money to support the MAXD technology, deserve to be rewarded by that core business success. Any lawsuit gains can just be gravy.

Very true, this dilution is terrible. Unfortunately, MAXD management have tried and failed to prevent it before. I believe the stock is easily controlled by outside entities, who have the ability to buy and sell the stock when they choose, and set the levels as a result. The investors that supported buying the stock at higher levels all got burned; as soon as their support was depleted, the price was easliy driven down again. There is just a trace of interest from investors outside those who already own stock, and no new good investors. The only real active traders are those looking for a quick gain on a small investment from a stock price change from, say, $.025 to $.027 (7% gain, Wow!)
I believe the stock should be holding between $0.20 - $0.30, which it did sustain for a very long time. Unfortunately, I think all the "management reports indicating what they non malisciously believed to be impending success events, which ultimately never occurred" finally ticked bigger investors off, leading them to abandon the stock and sell off large quantities, which allowed a frustrating drop in price. So to, it is likely all the stock compensated service providors chose to sell and collect what they could, rather then stay long with the company.
I honestly don't expect anything to change without new management, which is so greatly needed. I think we're all stuck until something good comes from the lawsuits, or until actual significant revenue is generated. Until then......

It might be that this is the source of the money that has paid the fees to pursue the Google/Netflix cases in Germany. The 33 million shares, if sold or providing a loan guarantee at a value of $0.015 (just guessing on that), would equate to around $500K.

If so, I hope MAXD management follows through with their side of the deal, whatever it may be. It could get pretty ugly if an entity with 33 million shares decided to sell off, especially if they could make a tidy profit at $0.02 per share! Let's hope that never happens. Even so, 33 million shares qualifies as an affilliate status, which I believe would bring some restriction.

This info should be documented in the next 10-Q in a couple of months. Hopefully by then, some of the existing deals will finally show revenues, to offset any concerns of deeper debt.

Not sure what the latest MAXD SEC filing might mean...but I can't say it doesn't make me nervous. The 13-G filing yesterday is for conversion of almost 33 million shares of MAXD stock. The group doing the conversion would not appear to have a good reputation: https://www.hotstocked.com/article/90746/stragenics-inc-otcmkts-asab-pops-after-new.html
I don't know if this could mean a jump up rally in the stock is coming, or if this Vis-Vires Group is going to sell off and convert to cash, driving the price down. Any thoughts on this?

I have looked into this, and found the following; this is the link for the lawsuit for the Architectural Systems technology:

http://www.sccaseinfo.org/pa6.asp?full_case_number=1-14-CV-274103

There is also a page for the original VSL technology filing. However, the case was dismissed without prejudice by MAXD last year. I'm assuming they filed a new case, or incorporated it into the Architectural Systems case, but I haven't seen anything clarifying what has happened. Here's that link:

http://www.sccaseinfo.org/pa6.asp?full_case_number=1-14-CV-269231&crumbs=Civil%20Calendar&crumbs=Party/Case%20Type%20Search&crumbs=Party/Case%20Type%20Results

From what I have found, Germany does not offer web sites with court info. The Netflix case is out of Germany, along with Google there as well.

I agree, Netflix will have to resolve sooner. I believe they are communicating with Google's legal team, however, since they are licensing the technology from Google, and any settlement by Netflix will likely go directly to Google. It is the nature of legal to wait to the very last second to settle, unless they can find a way to stall even longer. In MAXD's case, no doubt Google is hoping they'll fail for cash issues...but they should know that MAXD could, if they chose, go as far as shuttering the company and proceed with the lawsuit, as their legal team is on a a contingency. Hopefully we'll see December or early January result in a settlement for the case in Europe, and include the USA cases as well. I do believe Google could aquire the technologies, even including MAXD, and spin it in such a way that they could increase their stock value to essentially cover the acquisition cost, and sweep all their bad doings under the rug. However, with egos at stake, reason and financial opportunity often takes a back seat. Let's hope Google values reason.

I think it's a tough call, as much is up in the air. Ultimately, I think it is a good stock to go long with, but I recommend you take a deep look to see that there's a comfort level for you. I don't think you need to dive in immediately (though I'd love to be wrong!)
The three month possibility is, in my opinion, no change, or a possible big jump. The key to the jump is really the lawsuits against Google and Netflix. The cases appear to be strong, and a settlement, or possibly even an acquisition of the company, could create a significant increase in stock value. But legal events usually translate to long, drawn out delays. The hope is that the cases in German courts will move rapidly, possibly concluding as soon as December.
There are hints of possible big business deals, but that situation has been out there for a long time now. I would recommend watching the stock closely, looking for confirmation, and avoiding speculation buys.
The stock appears to be visible to only a small audience. That might create a window of opportunity if something big breaks, the opportunity to buy in before the news spreads to a level that volume buying drives the price up rapidly (and that's "if" it drives it up rapidly, but the right news might do so.)

Quantum, let me clarify my perspective. First, I share information for other investors to help them with their decisions, and appreciate others who do the same. It's just regular folks posting, not the opening discussion of Mad Money. My comments can be researched for accuracy. Is anything I said untrue? If it is, let me know so I don't post anything incorrect.
It's just my view, but I don't consider a five year old company a "start-up", and I know well the risks involved with small cap companies.
As far as use of the word "promise", that's just tying to the investment terms "overpromise/underdeliver and underpromise/overdeliver. If you feel the need to use another term, that's fine...let's call the press releases "company revelation for public review". As such, a public press release is information that investors can use to base their investment decisions. I may be going out on a limb here, but I would also say it is information the company can use to influence investors, preferably in a way that is ultimately favorable to their stock price. To the best of my knowledge, this process is quite common in the securities markets.
For the sake of your argument claiming accuracy, perhaps you will be more comfortable with, say, "management is not promising, and has not promised, anything. None of the potential business activities, related to income, that they have revealed in the past, have come to fruition....but some feel this has not been with an intent to mislead, and should not be considered a reflection of the performance or quality of management."
My last clarification is that I invested in the stock to make money, and I did so with the expectation that the company would perform. Never in my wildest dreams did I expect all the revealed business plans and opportunities to be non revenue producing at this time. I do my due diligence to review the company condition and direction, and I do not feel obligated to cheer them on.
As I said before, it's time to "light this candle", and get MAXD producing income. IMHO, five years is enough time to have learned enough to produce at least some revenues.
I don't think I look foolish for stating things as I see them. In truth, I would love MAXD to make me look foolish by producing revenues, creating new business partnerships, and ultimately driving the stock price up! Come on MAXD, prove me wrong and make me look bad! I'll take my shame straight to the bank!

It would be fantastic if Google acquired MAXD, and in truth, that is the best business decision for them. That would be clean, and can be spun to cover all their sins and promote a high tech acquisition to perhaps push their stock price up.
However, Google seems to be a bit of a monster these days, crushing alll before them. They have placed three former employees in the US Patent office, including the top dog. They also have placed Megyn Smith, another ex employee, in the White Houses as the nations Chief Technology guru. As the #2 contributor to the Democratic party, they have friends in high places. Megyn Smith was running the project that stole the VSL Communications technology. I believe Google's attempt in these moves is to change patent law to allow them to steal blind!
Much on the lawsuit hinges on what happens in Germany (sort of a first stage ruling), and that will be commencing and finishing in December (the German courts don't waste time like here in the US.) Netflix is likely holding off on settling with MAXD pending the outcome there as well. Ultimately, a settlement or acquisition should be in excess of a billion dollars...you can review the details of the case(s) to see why. Keep in mind that in a settlement MAXD does not get all; likely 1/3 goes to the legal firms, and maybe as much to the former principles of VSL and Architecture Systems. Even so, a settlement payout will end all of MAXD's debt, and pump in a chunk of cash to allow it to move forward. It should be huge for the stock, possibly pushing it over $1.00, or even higher. I would recommend keeping a close watch as December nears, but I expect MAXD to linger at $0.02 - $0.03 until then, easing any need to buy in right away. See how things unfold; I think there's still plenty of time to do that.
As for revenues, one thing is sure: MAXD management has no credibility. They have promised much, and delivered nothing. As such, I believe the only option there is to wait until they produce financial reports showing real revenue with good, stable companies....believe it only when you see it. I just don't see any other choice, given the company history. The technology has a huge upside, but it won't get up and have a run away success overnight. I think, again, there is time to buy in at a good price after you can confirm the product is rolling.

I would love to see some form of large investment buy up a controlling share of the company, and put management in place that can take the company to where it should be. Although they won't want to admit it, Greg Halpern and John Blaisure of MAXD are not the people to do so. The most recent press release shows their distance from reality...a new logo! Wow, that will turn things around for sure! Not to insult or offend, but Greg Halpern and John Blaisure are simply positive thought pushing promotors. There is a place for that in marketing, but it doesn't take care of the other needs of the company. Sadly, I get the impression they refuse to address anything that is negative, and are likely dropping the ball on deals as a result. Neither of them appears to understand full business management. This is a time for them to put their egos aside, put their potential net financial gain forward, and allow people who know how to make this company succeed to run the show. I have seen ego destroy wealth opportunity in many small cap companies...specifically, the people with the ego destroying their own financial opportunity due to their arrogance. Unfortunately, it usually means many others get hurt financially as well. The timing and opportunity for success of Max Sound Inc. appears to be now; let's hope there's a big financial backer out there who can come in and make it happen, or at the very least that MAXD hires someone capable to run the company!

Just to follow up on my post with a few additional things...
The consulting group I mentioned is Big Fish; that was announced in May of 2014, and nothing has come from it. Older press releases are hard to find, but I did find the following:

- Pitbull, the entertainer; nothing from that.
- AEG Network, expanding MAXD into multiple markets; nothing.
- Dreamteam Group, nothing.
- API interface, supposedly allowing MAXD into multiple audio devices...again, nothing.
- Lookhu, an online TV/Movie site; nothing.
- MAXDonline.com, audio book sales; nothing.
- MAXD-HD Audiobox, for movie production; nothing.
- An app for Apple products, on Apple's store; nothing yet.
- Luna mobile, calling for "winter 2015" sales release; nothing yet.
- Santok, the most recent announcement..,but nothing yet.

The problem here should be pretty obvious. There is overpromising and under delivering, and then there is this: overpromising and NO delivering. As I said, the product is the real deal. Investors are not being given any explanation for it's complete lack of sales after many years.

There's been a lot, and I'll have to go back to see them all.
Going back to the SOAN to MAXD change, some of the names thrown around (supposedly being courted as customers) were Dolby, Sony, I think Paramount Pictures, Fox TV...and more I can't remember now, but will look up. Also, there was Liquid Spins and the prepaid cards that came with a guarantee of revenue...never happened, and Liquid Spins is apparantly abandoned! There was supposedly strong interest from the automotive industry; I think Mercedes was one who was supposedly very impressed with MAXD.....nothing has happened. How about the Qualcomm Snapdragon? There has not been any revenue generated by sales of the Snapdragon chip with MAXD inside, at least not in financial reports. There was a press release of a consulting or design group that was going to develop new business as an add on feature for their electronic audio device customers. Nothing. ZTE mobile phones, who make more phones then Apple....nothing. Akyumen phones....nothing. Prior to MAXD, the company was founded as a social media site, the SoAct Network...and it too is now apparently abandoned. SoAct and Max Sound both have had impressive advisory boards, yet, from what I can see, not a single sale has come from that. The company has been void of revenue, with one quarter supposedly "cash positive"...but that was by way of an accounting adjustment, likely to cover CEO Blaisure's promise to be cash positive that quarter. The MAXD technology is the real deal, but it can't sell itself. I think management now is somewhat obessed and distracted by the Googleliath lawsuit, but there's still a company to run here. It's time to "light this candle", and get real sales, real revenues, not just undelivered promises. I don't think MAXD can get a supportive response from investors until they see real (not promised) revenue.

No. The Advisory Board of MAXD has had no impact, despite the impressive names on the list. This is another Ho Hum release. MAXD needs revenues for the price to go up. All the Pie in the Sky promises from MAXD management so far have been fruitless. Investors want, and deserve to have, something real.

LED technology has not passed the technology by. The hype for LED technology would have you believing otherwise, but it is not true.
LED information has been highly, very highly, embellished. Linear fluorescent lighting (4' long lamps) is still far superior to LED for indoor lighting.

Regardless, daylight harvesting technology can easily be applied to LED lights, as it is to fluorescent. For this company, I don't think technology is the concern, company management is.

The technology and product have been, and are, sound. The importance of skilled management can not be understated in any business, and this is likely an example of a quality product wasted on a company with poor leadership. There are some instances of a product or idea succeeding in spite of company leadership....but unfortunately, this is not one of them.

Nice video with William Shatner, there on their home page. Shatner seems pretty sincere in his interest in what these guys are doing. Hopefully, he can bring the kind of exposure to SOAN that he brought to Priceline. It's certainly a big plus for a new company like this one.

I'm a site member. I like the fact that it is a tool I can be productive with, meaning that it isn't a site just to kill time with. I can have a combination of email / chat conversation, media storage and simple data transfer, without size limitation, a filtering web search, press releases, and news. It is based on "social action", but I see it more as a tool to consolidate my communication needs. In a sense, it's my own private business network.

Not to say I don't have social interests. In particular, I intend to get more involved in diabetes discussions, as I am a diabetic. One thing I see as beneficial with this site is that it is not sponsored in a way that tilts it to the sponsors bias. Often when I look up information on diabetes, it is be biased (and I've found often misleading) to the sponsors interests. Hopefully, I'll be able to share with others on their own experiences in dealing with their diabetes, and benefit from it.