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.
Jared, thanks very much for the BBX update. EOM
Rob
Shallow Pockets 1, I, too, would like to know what they mean by "on schedule". Unfortunately, so would
NV's competitors and anything that helps them certainly doesn't help us. Thus I will choose to remain in a state of benign ignorance and will
pull the trigger for the first of many celebrations
on the day of the prototype's unveiling.
If this contributes to the gnashing of our competitors collective teeth, so be it.
hitimer
Good posts, Bill. And now for something completely different, as the Monty Pythons woould say - to change the subject to today's events in the NVEI
share trading, about which I briefly commented earlier this afternoon, when I noted a prolonged absence of share trading. At that point it had lasted for approximately 1 hour 20 minutes +. That persisted for another` 20 minutes when 100 shares broke the silence and were traded (!). All information gleaned from my broker who reviewed the trading records during the last ~ 20 minutes or so of trading, during which,
apparently, several 5000 share blocks were traded in rapid-fire fashion, + a 1000 share smaller block. IN all, ~ 20,000 shares, +/-, all purchases, were
involved with a net Increase in share price of one (1) cent, whereas the day had previously seen 27K shares traded in total during the morning and early afternoon hours, until the hiatus, with a net loss of 2 cents (all prior to the events described above during the last 20 minutes of trading). I must say that I'm at a loss as to why the MMs are keeping the s/p in such a narrow trading range and would welcome any explanation of today's trading pattern. tia
Rob
No trades in stock for past 1'22 minutes, per RTQ on MSNBC. No news, volume stuck at 27K. Que pasa, amigos????
SimionDinger, permit me to interject my observations
re the content of Excel's responses to the various
questions and challenges which come his way. They have never been presumptuous, overweening, or
superior in nature. You must understand that, by
responding to many posters, he puts himself under the microscope with each post and they are read by
many who would have, by now, jumped all over him had
his posts been patronizing or less than objective.
In each one, virtually, the poster to whom he is responding is invited to contact the company for information. His sharing of info from NVEI by phone
or e-mail is clearly indicated as such but is NOT
treated as fact, as you seem to believe. I rise to his defense in recognition of his good works re this board, but perhaps others seem to operate on the principle that no good deed should go unpunished...
hitimer
mahinul, I quite agree with you regarding excel's extraordinary patience in responding to those who
seek information above and beyond that which NVEI has shared with us in a PR. A PR is most obviously not a 10K; it has no pretensions or responsibility for the revelations mandatory in such a publication.
That one should call for their equivalent responsibility in publishing company information is
missing the point of their separate and distinct
missions. It is patently obvious - to this reader, at least - what one needs to do if he/she is dissatisfied with the level of information disclosed in a PR - contact the company and request what one wants to find out. To continue haranguing the board over this alleged failure to disclose without making this call most immediately reveals the haranguer's agenda to be - not what he claims it to be (a lack of information) - but rather a screed against the company involved, for whatever reason. Such cryptopolemics serve no good purpose, IMO, for the obvious reason that it is serving a personal agenda in no way related to the PR. At any rate, that is how it comes across. How simple it would be for the
complainant to call the company, discover - or not - what he/she seeks and then, in a fit of cooperation,
proceeds to share what was found out with the board. Could it be any simpler? I think not. The only subsequent posts I will read by the complainants will be their response from the company as to the subject of their queries. Anything else I will deem agenda-driven and wasteful of my time.
Rob
"...Carbon copies of failure after failure..."
Surfca2, your persistence in filing post after post about a company which you have no faith in, no reward for the risk to be taken (as you pointedly
state in no uncertain terms in the post to which I am responding) makes one wonder, en fin, what is the reason for your interest in this stock and why the continued exchange of posts? Not that I need every post to be supportive of the stock without fail; we all recognize that it's made its share of errors about which I, and others, have commented upon on numerous occasions. I welcome reasoned commentaries on NVEI and find them stimulating, at the very least. Yours, regrettably, have been unfailingly negative in cast, for which reason I find them to be of little polemic value, nor do I find myself enlightened by their perusal. Not that you exist to
provide me with such enlightenment, nor I for providing an audience for you. I seem to be saying that, if we were to disappear from each others' presence, the existential result would prove to be mutually beneficial. endit.
Surfca, your status as a builder of companies and hirer of individuals has led you to choose those
who would satisfy your proprietary needs, as befits the company's requirements - all a reasonable assumption, I'm sure you would agree. Now we have here a company beset with multiple variants which, over time, places differing skills upon the CEO as the varying executive needs alter accordingly. Moreover, he is willing to foresake much of his income so to allow the continuing survival of the company. Did you happen to include that in his job descripton when you sought him out? And when you hired him, did you inquire as to whether he was capable of altering the nature of the company, from primarily an entertainment-based endeavor to one of high scale communications technology? No? What would be the likelhood of your obtaining such a multifaceted individal who could turn on a dime so
as to execute the alterations demanded of such a far-reaching move? And now that we have reached the point of executing the critical transformation from
R/D to prototype formation/synthesis/open loop trials, with 3 telecoms signed up and hot to trot, you honestly believe that our tech solutions will go a-begging and that we will have but sour milk to offer them? You, the person who has started up companies, hired the help to make them run, now see
NV as having retained imcompetents who are unable to deliver the goods? Where were your complaints to their mgmt who hired them; that they were of inadequate training and background to carry off such
a demanding task? Nothing but a thundering silence do I see in that area; a deep, profound blackness
emanating from your posts regarding their level of skills to take on such a manifold, complex job.
Indeed, you had no such second thoughts - so why do you think that they will come up with sour milk now?
Instead of hibernating, you might consider taking up a course in logic 101. LOLOL
Surfca2, It's absolutely amazing that we are talking about the same company and person. I'm referring to a company laden with tech and IT talent, possessed of patents for the telecom ages, put together by whom? A CEO you describe as unfit or unable to pull this off? How did he do it? Smoke? Mirrors? The proof of the pudding is where? Do you own a company? Hire its employees? Yes, I agree; it is time for you to hibernate - we'll awaken you when your shares fructify.
Rob
Surfca2, I'm a bit bewildered by your agreeing with my post yet suggesting that they turn Ray (and Howell) out to pasture. I explicitly pointed out
what Ray had accomplished, despite the most arduous of circumstances, and without which Cooper would have precious little to work with. On the face of it, you might think those to be outrageous remarks,
but if you would re-read my last post, I carefully outline Ray's accomplishments which have served NV so well and which have served to prepare it for the likes of Cooper and all that he brings to the table.
Finally, may I point out that you are judging NV by
standards normally reserved for producing companies.
Reading a 10K of a BB company is. normally, a study in frustration - usually major dilution and little to show for it except mounds of shares and no income. This is why DD of a BB company needs to be so intensive as to uncover the potential riches that may be hidden in the veins of ore - or not. The DD is there for all to see, brought to us by the continuing efforts of Pengy and Porscha, and for which we are in their debt, and by other contributors to the general body of NV information.
IMO, NVEI is the LAST among BB stocks one would dismissively toss aside because of dilution. Theirs
is as nothing compared to the swollen floats and outstanding shares weighing down he imminent corpus delecti of numerous BB stocks currently approaching room temperature. Even the MM's, running counter to their normal escapades, raised the Bid size to 2500, this afternoon, keeping the Asked size @ 500. They are hungry, if not desparate, for shares and dropping the Bid/^ the bid size is just not cutting it for them.
All this happened with the s/p > $1.00. Why do think it is that they could not manipulate the volume of shares available to them by their normal maneuvers?
They should be aware by now that NV is not that susceptible to their normal tricks of trading for the very reasons we have to believe that it is a success story waiting to happen. Patience.
Rob
zz - thanks; I appreciate your response. EOM
Brady, I do agree with you that Cooper's appearance in June, '02 will mark a turning point in NVEI,
one that will be, IMHO, characterized by an increasing emphasis on marketing and commercialization. Ray's singular contribution has been, overall, a gathering of forces within the corporation so as to completely alter the direction of the model from entertainment to technology.
Considering that this sea change has been done on the fly, it is a wonder that it has been done AT ALL
since most BB companies, even with a well-defined business model, never achieve this level of
potential. Ray, et al have attained our present
remarkable developmental stage despite all of its hiccups, false starts, and wrong turns, all the while making important hiring decisions and securing
a world class level of technological and IT personnel. I believe it is important to give Ray his due and that Cooper will, indeed, be standing on his shoulders as he brings NV forward into the highly
competitive tech arena. He will, IMO, make manifest the destiny made possible by Ray's efforts in bringing the company forward to its current level of
achievement/development - a singular effort, IMHO.
hitimer
Today's announcement should suffice to one and all that, not only is the Emperor wearing clothes, they are, indeed, very spiffy. It serves to formally characterize NV's corporate and technological relationship with Adaptive Technologies, a company which has served NV well by providing its core patents towards solutions of NV's technological applicabilities. It augers well for NV's impending commercialization stage by firmly securing its own core tech base with the necessary patents and their
attaching royalties, etc. A major step forward for Ray and company. Well done.
Matt - Please explain what happens to a post that makes material claims but does not factually back it up? Is it allowed to remain on the board or can it be removed solely because there is no ascertainable substantiation of the material claims? From my perspective, these stipulations can clearly delineate a post as to its survivabilty. If it is clearly determined that the material claims
can not withstand scrutiny when a bright light is shined upon it, and it is then, demonstrably, a bogus claim, then what is the basis for allowing its remaining on the board (should that be your viewpoint)? Thank you.
Rob
Justin, a brief note re your concern about NVEI's
future. The most singular piece of information that has been shared with us is, IMHO, that Tom Cooper
has un-retired to lead our company. He doesn't need to , you know. He retired VERY wealthy from his prior corporate efforts (which are well-known). That he has chosen to re-enter the corporate wars by heading up our little BB company tells us VOLUMES
about how he regards it and our potential. That one change in our mgmt structure, IMHO, puts so much information between the lines for us to easily decipher should put all of our worries and concerns about NVEI to rest. He will lead our marketing and commercialization efforts - end of one story, beginning of our next one!
best, Rob
Justin, JH has told us, in previous e-mails printed out on this board, that it was NVEI's practice not to reveal anything of significance, especially re patents, for public consumption since it is their intent to keep potential competitors
in the dark as much as possible. It is their position that anything that could potentially auger against us in the way of revealing company secrets or data will remain tightly-held information. That JH seems "unsure" of how many patents that we have either filed for or have been secured should be looked upon from this perspective. Should he want to tell us of the precise number and variety of patents we have, it is just a phone call away for him to get that info and tell us. Similarly, his vagueness about other unrevealed information falls into the same category. I would disbelieve any information he would share with us in either category for these reasons until such time as our security allows. We are sitting on a potential gold mine of information
which would be swiped from us in a NY minute were it
accidentally made available. Our IP in the form of or tech patents are our most precious possessions, which is why Dr Beck et al have been retained in our employ to ensure their primacy and privacy. It's just normal business practice, and,IMHO, we should expect nothing less from JH.
best, Rob
Ben - what you have to say about patents makes a lot
of sense. Thanks.
Rob
"An inevitable outcome", JH says of "our affiliation with recognized companies". What a revealing
statement! Today's mention of NVEI and MSFT in the same sentence indeed seems to be a harbinger of things to come. Dr. Greaves and his Computer Lab
will, IMHO, prove to be a midwife to many inter-company offspring. Gestation # 1 (?) - Corona
and "Step Into Liquid". Heartiest congratulations to those proud parents, NVEI and MSFT; may their mutual efforts be many!
Rob
Alan, thanks for sharing JH's response. This helps to explain the timing of his ascent to CEO.
Rob
Simiondinger, Your assessment of this IHub board is
SO wrong as to be 180 degrees opposed to the truth.
What is presented as fact needs to conform to what is KNOWN. What is speculation, or opinion, needs to be labelled as such and is welcome; if it flies in the face of well-known facts, if it is poorly or inadequately reasoned,
or illogical in its premise or argument, then it will be challenged and dicussed on the board without ad hominem attacks or vitriol. This usually continues until points are resolved - or not - and then we move on. IN Twister's case, which has been discussed to a fair-thee-well, his presentation of allegedly aligned and interdependent events - s/p and Cooper's CEO PR - was challenged on several posts. It was NOT challenged because his thesis was at variance (i.e., negative) with
others, but because of its illogicality, if I may speak for those who have made their thoughts known on this subject. At least, that was the point at issue in my post pertaining to this matter. Speaking for myself, I found his presentation to be civil, points clearly made and which invited discussion. I look forward to his future posts.
hitimer JMHO
Twister, a few observations relevant to your continuing concern about the s/p drop vis-a-vis
the Cooper announcement:
1. The s/p drop occured as the market bought more at the asked price than sold at the bid price.If anything, that indicates - in and of itself - a positive action by
the investors. One must ask the MMs as to why that occured, not the prudent investor who seemed to support the day's announcement.
2. The s/p drop is a momentary event reflecting traders buying and selling, investors buying into the stock (for the most part, IMO), and the MM's backroom activity (assumed from the B/A dollar comparison), etc. Cooper's elevation to CEO is a much more far-reaching event that easily transcends the momentary day's price in the marketplace of NVEI's stock, IMO. To use these two events as an equally-
weighted comparison is to disregard their relative importance to NVEI, a point which your argument seems to disregard. As stated above, one is of signal importance, the other (s/p), of passing notice. To join them together within a tightly-woven interaction transcends credulity.
3.Finally, your hope that your points, which you consider to be of valid concern, and from which you hope that mgmt can extract lessons to be learned (to paraphrase you) makes an assumption that mgmt READS this board (an unwarranted assumption in the first
instance) and that they cuncur with your reasoning. I can only suggest that you present your construct to mgmt via e-mail or (free) telephone call to ensure that your message reaches them and, perhaps, saves them from themselves (a conclusion drawn from your - IMO - overreaching self-evaluation of your treatise) and enriching us in the process.Thank you.
hitimer JMHO
I've been waiting for the other shoe to fall, trained,as we are, to expect a self-limiting rise in share price from time to time, only to see it recede to prior levels. We spent some time between the .40 - .50+ range doing just that. Now, the s/p is powerfully, unrelentingly, moving upwards without a glance backwards, not filling gaps, closing near or at the high of the day, the B/A moving in lockstep, not separating by more than 3 cents, +/-,
and all done with high volume. I believe our buyers are a mixture of new blood brought in by Elite and by the stock advisories now touting NVEI. Despite the trader nature of many of those who have been purchasers, it seems as though - even while taking an occasional breath - the latent power behind the stock's move continues become manifest, urging it upward. IMHO, this indicates a goodly number of those who have read this company's story, observed the influx of top tier scientists into the organization, realized the potency and imminence of the technology's commercial realization, and who now see this stock as we - the sooners - have come to regard it:
as one whose time has come, with a bright future in store for it, and for us. JMHO.
Happy Days,
Rob
Disco_Pig - I just came back to the board and spotted your brief post and began to formulate my reply when I noticed that excel (thank you) had already done so. To that I'd only add, at those fees for these top tier people, IMHO, we'd get off cheap at twice the price. They are, IMO, at the forefront of their respective professions. They get the big bucks because they earned it. How much would you have paid them?
Rob
Sketz, thanks for posting the salient portion of the 10Q. Biz as usual - going concern warnings pro forma
but, IMHO, not too much longer, pending events this
coming summer, et seq. It feels like the eye of a hurricane, awaiting the swirling winds of future events.
best, Rob
Greg, you and Ernie have laid SON's agenda bare with surgical precision and clarity. It is obvious that he is directing ad hominum attacks towards you, Judge Sorkin, and, inferentially, Dodi and her corporation. Methinks he is a candidate for a pink slip on that basis alone. JMHO
Rob
Twister, I concur with your observation that the
current mgmt permit the highly qualified people they have secured for NVEI's tech development be given
free range to pursue their goals. I assume, from their laudatory statements regarding these stellar additions to the NVEI armament, and their stated faith in their ability to carry us forward, that mgmt will, indeed, be happy to steer the ship while
the engineers labor below (or above, depending on one's point of view). It seems that they have arrived upon a happy division of responsibility, given the picture that recent letters to s/h's have painted. I must give mgmt kudos for recruiting the
superior individuals now on board to carry the NVEI technology forward. It was the absolutey critical step necessary to right the ship (to continue the analogy) and bring matters forward expeditiously
and on point, IMHO. Yes, we all have memories of past bungles in their attempts to pursue the highly complex matter of running this corporation, but those are receding quickly into the past and their present steps seem to be accurate and sure-footed.
The future seems bright.
Rob
I don't know what the fuss is all about when the stock drops a few cents. There was concentrated buying hard upon the stellar news we had recently about Tom Cooper and Dr. Chen, as well as the announcements about our retaining Elite and the company's participation at an industry get together, our "coming out party", as it were. The runup included gapping - normally presaging retrenchment - which is what has happened, along with usual profit-taking in some quarters. Standard activity for a stock. Smile and be happy! JMHO
Rob
Agreed, Tom - and let us not forget the Elite announcement which, in effect, started off this bandwagon. With each step, IMO, we will see a bit of Big Mo gathering pace. Not too visible now, but it is bit like all shoulders to the push, with one more added yielding discernible movement. It might reveal itself as s/p movement not reversing course, or a string of begets as each PR>>>sets other wheels in motion. Idle speculation now, but, IMO, hardly considered as worthy of consideration just 10 days ago. This, IMO, indicates how nicely the pump has been primed.
Soon is Now. Man your seatbelts, fellow Sooners! JMHO.
Rob
Bill, I have never read a JH e-mail so filled with golden portents. The future has never seemed brighter. Thanks very much for sharing it with us.
best, Rob
Bill, thank you for posting the Knight-Rider article dissecting the benefactors and financial providers for the T-D bill about broadband regulation. It
gives further weight to a similar article in the
2/26 NYTimes I made reference to in one of my recent posts. The Reps will love this passage for the reasons mentioned: the lobbyists will be their constant companions (read:DONORS) over the ensuing years as the Baby Bells, et al, try to get their monopolistic goals met. Since Reps are in a constant state of raising money for their biyearly election campaigns, this one piece of legislation for the broadband bill has them emptying out their drool cups with increasing regularity. Fortunately, the Senate, in their infinite wisdom, continues to provide a daunting roadblock to these machinations. Once can only hope that they will continue to withstand the largess likely to be - or already is - showered upon them. All IMHO.
best, Rob
A slight correction to the NYTimes article citation in my previous post. It is found in the Times of 2/26, not today's Times.
Rob
Here is an additional reference to the escalating Congressional broadband wars, found in today's NYTimes. This article is quite revelatory, and lists the cast of characters involved in the trench warfare this bill (Tauzig, et al) has recruited.
It clearly defines the issues which have prompted the pitched battles now under way,and the reasons why we may be seeing this in the headlines for years to come.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/27/technology/27BROA.html?todaysheadlines
It makes little difference, from all accounts, as to the out come of the House votes. This bill under discussion (Tauzig, et al) will meet its Waterloo, IMO, in the Senate where, as previously stated, there are very powerful forces - including committee chairman - who are aligned foursquare against it. It is even doubted by some that it would even come out of the Senate committee. THAT is where it is reputed to be dead in the water, not in the House vote.
Greg, it seems to me that, if NVC were to be challenged as to what stage their chipset had been morphed into shape, they could show them whatever they want and tell them whatever they want to about it, as long as they don't let it out of their possession. And I don't think that any company whould expect them to do that. I believe that the TRUE test of their evolution into a working prototype will come about when they succcessfully test it themselves in their own field trials. At that time, they will give it to the awaiting telecom for their own field trials done, one assumes, with
NVC's assistance. At any point along that chain,
to further sustain their claims as to functionality,
inquiring telecoms can be told that it is under final analysis and trials (should they be permitted
to do so without, of course, disclosing the name of the telecom). I would imagine their releasing false timelines is strictly to throw the bloodhounds off course, and that they'll say whatever they want, to protect their rears. I, for one, would not pay too much attention to the dates they give out at this time for these reaasons. I expect that we'll all be blown away when the true releases are made. Until then, we'll be treated to their increasing engagement with the communication industry, evolution of their media campaign, getting onto Naz when the price allows that to happen, absorbing hytek, and, all the while, preparing for the final trials of the tech. JMVHO
best, Rob
retiresoon, this bill which you discuss in your post and about to be presented to the House is, as I understand it, dead in the water since the Senate has powerful opponents to it and it may not even reach the apporpriate committee for evaluation. I agree completely with the argument against it. If passed, it will allow the development of US's version of Deutsche Telekon or BT, both towering monopolies in their respective countries. You know the old saw: "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it." I sure hope that some of our Reps go back to their history books and review Standard Oil's tussle with the Supreme Court.
best, Rob
Firstly, let me thank all those who reported on the Dallas meeting. I'm glad that so many of you felt that it was worthwhile and contributory. The reports were informative and further fleshed out mgmt and
introduced Elite to us. No doubt, they will be a very important player in the months to come.
NVC announcing their participation in the industry association was a signal event, initiating them and
introducing themselves to their peers in the communication industry. As to the timing of the announcement - the day of the event - it was a little surprising at first but, since it was a
professional meeting to which we could not attend,
it may have been timed thusly for marketing purposes. First the announcement, then followup discussion of its occurrence, and who knows what else they have in store? Since their intention is, ultimately, to continue to bring the NVC technology to the attention of the industry, we might look forward to future such meetings or other manner or means of getting the word out. As the buzz develops,
or so the plan goes (as I understand it), the media
develops an interest and Elite rolls up their sleeves. This is how I see this meeting playing its role in NVC's commercialization roll out: a necessary first step. My applause to the company and to all shareholders who have stuck it out, lo these many years, to have arrived at this moment in NVC's
history. NVC has certainly validated our efforts, sustaining belief, and given the lie to those who
have thought otherwise. SOON has arrived!
Regards to all, Rob
Al, one notes the following events occuring
sequentially: Cambridge U.'s joint tech advancement, with NVEI, of the latter's desruptive technology and the appointment of an NVC Phd candidate to Dr. Greave's Computer Lab; NV's retention of Elite Corp to start spreading the word amongst brokers/institutions/investors and then, when appropriate, to the media, including, one assumes, Dr. Greaves "commercial" White Paper, with resultant increasing publicity of NV's disruptive technology;
and finally, the announcement made, as reported in your post, of the announcement by MIT, BT, and Cambridge University to form a "Disruptive Technology" group to develop ideas which will have the force of disrupting the status quo. Will the
nascent transatlantic group, noted above, snare a footnote to NVC's accomplishment as being an example to which it is dedicated? Stay tuned...Just an (amusing?) take on the Academic Research Industry.
JMVHO.
porscha, nice back ground piece on Judge Sporkin.
I agree: his presence on Elite's BOD should go along way toward elevating the general perception of their being a quality organization, just as our people on the advisory board, along with I. Berkowitz, et al, on our BOD enable NVC to withstand the severest scrutiny.
It looks like we're about to open for business!
best, Rob
EW, very nice post with good perceptions. It certainly does seem as though those poor, patient ducks are finally lined up in a row. Now it just seems to be a waiting period (what else is new?) before the first shots are fired and soooon becomes
nowwwwww.
best, Rob
porscha, since RB has you selling your stocks, you'd best find out from them how much money you got for them and who got the money? LOLOL
Rob