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.
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.
From that article that's circulating:
"Then the city learned that its stucco homes have a wire mesh that blocks signals, making Internet service poor or nonexistent indoors without extra equipment."
Great, like Pachuca doesn't have stucco and metal lath. This is probably why we haven't seen progress reports on deployment and subscribers. The entire house is shielded like a giant shielded cable or an RF transmitting device. Works great for keeping RF out (or in).
This is really getting depressing. Glad I'll be on vacation soon. No Mas Cables, No Mas Globetel, No Mas Nada.
There absolutely IS the need for proof of commercial operations in Pachuca. Nobody in the investment community believes a word that Globetel is saying relative to NMC.
Unlike those who wish for Globetel's demise, there are those who know that this must happen, and there is no good reason on earth that says we must wait for proof of operations in Pachuca.
The more time that goes by without it, the longer Globetel looks like a sham.
Just give out the number of active subscribers as of today, plus a link to the web site that shows the sign-up page. If necessary mirror the page but kill the links so that only someone logged on with a wireless computer can actually sign up and pay. (or allow it to take the money from anybody if that's legal)
If not, why not? Where is it?
How about a screen shot of what people now see when they log onto the network in Pachuca? Something meaningful, that's all. Something that is legitimate proof for purposes of due diligence by investors. And not more words and web sites.
How many subscribers are there in Pachuca and what are the revenues being generated? We have been told they exist and there is no reason not to make that information public. It would not affect SEC or anything else (except sp maybe).
At this stage in the game one subscriber would probably be good news for the market. Why aren't we being told? Do subscribers really exist? Just because we were told that they do does not mean that it is true. Obviously the market does not beilieve it to be true.
So simple to pr something that someone else can verify. Why nothing?
Vern, you made a liar out of me, you had the "guts" to answer each and every question. I appreciate that. Good job.
An excellent set of questions. Well formed and well thought out. Your post should be kept for future reference and should also be addressed to Huff and Jones as well.
However, I doubt that anyone has the "guts" to answer them.
Very good question. Only two possible avenues that I can think of. It existed before December (don't know how, don't know where) or the document is bogus. (don't know how, don't know who).
Don't know Jack, do I.
If a child says "There's a monster in the closet (or a fairy princess, for that matter)" do we believe there is something or someone in the closet since the child is the only source of information that is saying it? After all a child, especially your child, is a legitimate source, right?
If the same child says, "There is a bunny rabbit out on the lawn", we may give it some credibility but maintain a slightly skeptical attitude until we have had the chance to actually look and verify that there is a rabbit out there.
If the CEO of a company says something is going to happen and there always follows a sequence of events described through ultimately verifiable progress reporting, then this will demonstrate how what was said actually played out and what it all means to the company's future. Why bother? Because if you don't, people will suspect that you are incompetent, lying delusional, or worse and the share price will always react accordingly.
I want to know how many subscribers we have in Mexico and I want to know what the services we are supposedly offering look like, and I want to know it beyond yesterday.
I'm not demanding 'shareholders rights', I'm acting like every other investor out there, with the exception that I did not get disillusioned and sell (just disillusioned). Now it's not worth it to sell, and I continue to hope and believe there remains a chance for success. However this is based on the PR's that described intent, now there are results. WHAT ARE THEY? How many subscribers are there?
If you're afraid to say so, WHY?
If others say this is whining, then to me you sound like children screaming because their parents aren't convinced that there is a monster (or a fairy princess for that matter) in the closet.
I'm not speaking, the market is. All the talk in the world doesn't change that the market is saying this isn't worth anything.
I'm invested, but that doesn't change the facts.
"Don't know, but neither do you."
That's the whole point in it's entirety. Nobody knows, therefore it isn't worth a tinker's damn.
nerd...either that or have enough altitude to make up for not being in position at a lower altitude, essentially talking about line of site.
I'm the first to admit my imagination gets carried away and here's an example.
The Navy has all the aerostats they need. IMO the Skysat capability should be about being higher and getting up there faster. I'm thinking a rocket launch and then deployment similar to what they use in planetary entry sequences. Immediate deployment and availability of a system that is superior to satellites (no latency) for defending against missile attacks and also for the guidance of outgoing ordinance. Plus communications. Plus they can stay up there a while.
The semi-rigid body and boom type propeller system could be streamlined along with helium supply, electronics and power systems. That leaves the fins. They need to be collapsible for later deployment.
Do I really think this is what Globetel is into now? No, but maybe they should be.
That may well be true, Vern. I was not around until after you left the project.
Vern...in my mind the '06 announcement about tether testing came from the Huff / Jones crew, and they never met any deadline of any kind. Have we heard any similar promises from the new regime? I don't recall any.
While I'd love to see progress, I don't feel the same level of frustration as back when they would seemingly blurt out nonsense just for the sake of saying something, or to briefly pump the sp.
At least we know they have been pursuing legitimate interests. This kind of info indirectly bolsters my faith in the Pachuca efforts.
Still wondering if the Hotzone reorganization may have served the dual purpose of better accountability as well as a more government/security friendly organizational structure. Especially as security is listed as an issue in the CWID info.
Listen, here is what I think may be the most logical reading on all this.
Say I am the Government (Navy or even Raytheon) and I see some great wireless technology with a guy behind it (Uli) who I think can develop some very nice systems for my important military applications. The problem is Uli and Co. are wholey owned by this parent company (Globetel) that owns everything Uli develops for me or anybody else. I don't like that, in fact I won't buy anything if I have to worry about this parent company looking at everythig I develop, possibly compromising security, plus later on saying they want royalties from me every time I fire up the radios to conduct operations.
I want to develop it and buy it free and clear. So
Globetel says ok, what if we set it up so Uli's on his own as far as you, the government, is concerned, yet we still have everything we ever had as far as everything we were ever going to do or ever anticipated doing with Uli vis a vis other interests? All we, Globetel, will have to say about anything is the price that Uli sells to you for, and we get half of that. Any value we ever see from the sale is realized in the sale price, nothing can be owed to us down the road, nor will we necessarily be privy to certain details.
Now, if all that were to be true, what level of pricing would one expect to see on the sale of the radios? 50% could end up being extremely lucrative for Globetel. all imo.
The Navy is testing Hotzone 4010 and 4020's as supplied by Trimax. So the Navy info comes hot on the heels of the formation of Uli's company and its covenants with Globetel with regard to the Hotzone Product Line. As we know from the 8K, it's 50/50 with GTEM on profits from the Hotzone line of products:
"Sales. If Altvater sells any of the HotZone Product Line, GlobeTel shall receive 50% of the profit from such sale and Altvater shall receive the remaining 50% of profit from the sale. All pricing for the HotZone Product Line shall be at prices and upon such terms that are acceptable to the parties. GlobeTel, using its reasonable commercial discretion, may reject any sale by Altvater that it is directly competitive to a proposal already submitted to a customer or potential customer of GlobeTel."
So right there it's money for Globetel if Uli gets a Navy contract, imo.
I'm also drawn to an interpretation of the following paragraph from the 8k, but there is something puzzling about it that perhaps someone might be able to help clarify. Are the blanks accidentally filled in when Wavesat and Timesys are mentioned, or are there two other entities being referenced, in addition to Wavesat and Timesys?:
"Licenses. GlobeTel grants Altvater a license for the licenses and all rights it holds with [***], Inc. and with [***] pursuant to the assignable license agreements attached hereto as Exhibits C and D, for a period of ninety nine (99) years, or for as long as GlobeTel maintains the license. In connection herewith, Globetel will attempt to obtain, within ten days after execution of this Agreement, a consent of the foregoing assignments from Wavesat, Inc. and with TimeSys Corporation. Altvater understands that the consent is granted by [***] and [***] and is not under the control of GlobeTel."
Yes I read that, I don't see it offhand without wading back through them. I took it as saying the 13 were the test network with 70 more following on.
Given that delivery on this purchase order will likely contribute relatively little in the way of profits, the bump in share price was likely due to other factors such as were discussed on the other board.
This was not a meat and potatoes PR, but it was most definately a highly positive one that presents good progress on the route out of this jungle.
Congratulations to Globetel on the successful outsourcing and delivery of their first purchase order. This is a major milestone. Clear goals, focus, efficiency and an intelligent approach to managing the perceptions of shareholders is really making this new team look incredibly good; like a real business, for the first time ever.
The Mexico City / Pachuca corridor deployment was likely in the master plan all along. Testing in Pachuca first and expanding out from there seems like a well conceived approach. That should garner maximum attention up front with the word getting out to the already ripe markets who will hopefully be ready, willing, and waiting down the road. I don't know but I would expect the head end, so to speak, is in Pachuca.
I see some steady and skilled hands at work here, both domestically and on the VPN side. Hopefully we are pulling back from the brink of disaster. Execution is excellent so far, all that is left after deployment is market acceptance, which seems most promising. Very nice indeed.
The Strat on the back burner is prudent and appropriate. Watch those eggs in Pachuca and go on from there after they've hatched.
Nerd, That's right, you would need the existing radio frequencey (rf) topography to know how to locate the boxes.
When are they going public? lol
This would be the outcome of the SEC investigation. Is it not safe to assume that the SEC has finished their investigation?
I take your point. In that case the settlement should be a pitance.
Here's an example of what I am trying to say about liability insurance. It doesn't involve fraud, but maybe it will help illustrate the concept.
If I am a doctor, which I am not, and a really rich patient comes along and says here's a contract that says I'll pay 100 times the normal fees if you'll guarantee the outcome of this operation against anything less than a perfect outcome. If I sign it, then my professional liability insurance will not cover me. I have agreed to a higher standard of care than is standard for the industry. To the extent that the agreement covers risk beyond a standard level of care, that risk is mine, not the insurance company's.
It's the same for fraud. Fraud is outside of the insurance company's range of risks covered.
so? how does that affect what I said?
If they settle on the basis of fraud charges, the insurance company may say, no, we won't pay unless you go to trial so you are on your own in your settlement. Furthermore, if you are guilty of fraud after it does go to trial, we won't pay either.
What is your point, anyway?
If it is that it is difficult to prove fraud, I agree. That does not affect what I said about insurance coverage.
You start by stating I'm inconsistent, then go on to discuss a different topic without showing any support for that statement.
Plaintiffs can allege what they choose, yes, but in this case they are alleging fraud. If that is wrong, show me why.
You are discussing the tactics and possible outcomes of legal actions. That is a different topic and you may be correct in what you have to say about it.
I'm talking about the insurance company paying if the plaintiffs succeed in proving fraud, or if Globetel settles on the basis of having committed fraud. People think no big deal, the insurance will cover the damages. That's not true, imo.
coast..that sounds right. That is consistent with any other form of professional liability coverage I've seen. The metaphor for insurance coverage is a roof or an umbrella. If one takes steps out from under the coverage, one gets rained on. Choosing to engage in fraud is rarely, if ever, covered.
So if Globetel was dumb they're covered, if they were crooks they're not.
Plaintiffs are saying Globetel and Huff are crooks if I'm not mistaken. That is very tough to prove because it goes to what was inside the skull. I recall the discussion about 'intent' (forgot the legal term) and that it was part of the judge's decision to drop all names except Huff's, so I guess that is where we're at. Huff and Globetel are not covered, imo.
Sorry to hear about Joe M. He seemed to have some real talent from what I saw with the JV agreement that had his name on it. He also received positive credit in at least one PR that came out. So much for my theory of him becoming the next CEO. Wrong again.
His termination occured the day after the release of the operational update to shareholders. Consistent with winding down Centerline.
All this must apparently need to be out of the way before the financials are released. They must be loaded.
3531niapoc..the latter would be a high possibility if it had never been working, but they have said in an 8K (and I believe it) that a pilot has successfully been deployed. Just because we haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Proof would be good but your argument doesn't hold water.
Further you are wrong about not owning changes to Hotzone. From the 8K:
"Any subsequent development of Intellectual Property by Altvater shall not be a derivative of nor a modification of the Intellectual Property owned by GlobeTel."
"Any intellectual Property paid for by GlobeTel to Altvater for the any development, repair or maintenance of the HotZone Product Line will be the exclusive property of GlobeTel."
For that matter Globetel also has first right of refusal on the rest of the stuff Uli cooks up:
Right of First Refusal. For a period of one (1) year after execution hereof, GlobeTel have the right of first refusal to purchase from Altvater any newly developed wireless system or radio developed by Altvater, at the cost of $1,250 per unit if any unit is in a die cast mold, or at the best price provided to any other customer, whichever is less. After the first one (1) year after execution hereof, GlobeTel shall have the option of purchasing any unit upon the best terms and conditions as any other offer accepted by Altvater.
So your statements in this post are flatly wrong and imo overtly deragatory. (the opposite of overly promotional)
Serious1...thanks for the information. Your message nuked the bashers so they had to retaliate. There is no reason not to believe what you say.
Just keep us updated on what you hear, if you can tolerate the attacks that will surely follow.
That is where I saw the 'revenues' word. Actually the word revenues does not appear anywhere in the agreement in the 8K, which is why I got confused.
I've had time since this morning to go back over the JV agreement and it is very similar if not the same as you describe.
I said that revenues from the JV might be used to finance the Uli agreement. This was not technically accurate in the sense that the revenues do not go directly to Globetel. They go to the JV to be used for foreseeable expenses. The level of the payments going to Globetel from the JV for the boxes could be based on forseeable JV revenues. This in turn could have set the amount of Uli's contract, and the resulting rate of production of the boxes.
This is a different way of stating what I was trying to say earlier.
Maybe later when I have time I'll show you in the agreement for the JV, included with the 8k, where it says revenues will be divided. That is my recollection and I'm reasonably sure of the wording. Take a look yourself if you don't want to wait.
What about the revenue from subscriptions?
Posters were wondering where the $45,000 per month is coming from. Perhaps it is revenues from Pachuca (wouldn't that be great? Need proof though) At $32 per month per customer that would be 1,406 average customers for Globetel's share, which is 49% of the total (2,870 customers).
If they are hitting the downtown businesses first, then the $32 average customer number would not apply, but the revenues might be feasible.
Supposedly we have a paying network in Pachuca. Hopefully that will be shown in the financial reporting that is feverishly being prepared as we speak.
More accurately stated, the value of the arrangement is to No Mas Cables de Mexico. This leads to the possibility that the cost of this contract with Uli is attributable to Globetel's share of the capitalization of the JV.
It looks as though Uli has a great opportunity here, assuming all goes well with Mexico and more contracts roll in (big assumption, I know). If it does go great though, Uli will scale up and crank out many, many units.
Risky, given that he has never done anything like that before. Smart to make him an outsourced resource. This makes him responsible for his own efficiencies and management. If he doesn't perform, I don't know what Globetel's alternatives will be but some may exist. (hire axel?, lol)
This setup has a value for VPN; now they are assured that the person most capable of maintaining the performance standards established through the pilot will continue to be intimately involved during the build-out, for the first year at least.
axel, I could be wrong, but to be honest this sounds a little bit contrived. It seems to carefully hit on every current point of value that globetel may be perceived as having today as well as a few points from the past that have been recently discussed.
It also sounds like it is promoting the capabilities of the people who are no longer with Globetel, except of course for Uli now that he is back on the Globetel side as a consultant.
Do you have a link with some dates and details to go with it that to least make it seem authentic? Thanks for your efforts, it is all interesting reading.