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.
He also said words to the affect that Hotzone was out from under Globetel the weekend before last. Now we know there are 70 Hotzone 4010 units ready to go.
Never wrong? I don't think so; and you look increasingly like you merely believe what you want to believe. Could it be that you have become so emotionally invested in the failure of Globetel that it is starting to cloud your judgement?
You seem to take pride in being objective, yet now this. How come?
Nerd, I hate to be a smart-azz, but "the traffic on my VozBrasil phone has never been higher" could mean it is at zero.
I want to believe, brother. It's just that 'once bitten twice shy' kind of deal.
No one is saying there hasn't been a frustrating, and suspicious, train of starts and stops. They aren't even stops really; it's more like they fade away to nothing.
This one is taking the start much further along the path to fruition than any other contract with an outside entity has, however.
Not much for most companies but quite significant given Globetel's documented past.
Ironically, most of the other false starts kicked up some dust in the market. This one acts like a dead cat after the bounce.
That's true, it could be paid off quickly, I agree.
The focus now is on finalization of the JV. I think this was an important milestone toward that end.
At least it has the ring of logic to it. Still looking for the concrete results though.
Also could be some combination of cash and ownership, that would be good if it was enough to help keep Globetel out of debt. It does have a lot to do with what those development costs are worth.
sirius...It could be executed in that way if in fact it turns out to be a cash deal. On the other hand, that clause could be used to establish the value of the equipment, via an invoice sent by Globetel to the JV that includes cost plus, as you say. Then, as consideration for that invoice, rather than sending cash, the JV grants Globetel "a piece of the action" also known as ownership in the JV. Globetel still owes somebody for manufacturing the equipment (or not, I don't know) and if so must wait for revenues to flow and then start paying it down.
In either case, cash or ownership, the JV has to exist as an entity before anything else can happen, imo.
It appears that while the first 70 units are ready to go Globetel is waiting for something to happen before shipping them. That would mean that they were produced at risk, perhaps pending finalization of the JV agreement and receipt of some form of consideration for the equipment. That consideration could well be in the form of a downpayment on Globetel's JV terms, which we don't know.
Until the JV is final, the units should not ship, imo.
The JV may not have been able to be finalized until the units were ready to ship.
If they are going to go toward JV payments, then don't look for cash for the equipment, look for subscription revenues, later.
That would explain price action, or lack of.
It seems appropriate that IF the JV is materializing and Joe Montessori has carried the ball forward for a major score, if so then imo he should be CEO.
If by chance that is what has happened, then was the board cleared to make way for him to manage the population process and thus have the culture in place that he will need to execute?
That would be good.
I'll float a theory....what if they are clearing the board because Joe Monterosso is going to be named CEO and they want to let him bring in his picks?
He's a wheeler dealer, he would need to cement some relationships and have a fresh start.
I mean just about everyone is gone except the K-guys and Joe from what I can gather.
I don't know how SEC operates so let me ask; could today's pr be a follow up to some sort of SEC recommendation for getting a clean bill of health?
Ever the optimist, despite myself.
(Happy Birthday, Mide.)
Yes that's true, but unless it is some kind of sweetheart deal where the Peraltas give away money (can I have some?), or if there are (and there may be) other considerations, then common sense says they will have to pay capital to buy a ticket in. Certainly nothing has been said to indicate otherwise.
dejota...in reading the terms of the 8k, I don't agree. The capital for the JV is separate from the Hotzone equipment. Globetel sells the equipment to the JV for cost plus profit and that's the end of it. Next they have to pony up the JV dough, no credit for the equipment.
I was not commenting on Murch's timeline, hopefully he is being prudently conservative, and realistic.
I'm hearing you say incompetence does not equal being overpromotional. I guess that excuse would get them off the hook from the charges that were leveled at them, but as far as I'm concerned, it all adds up to the same thing: an artificially high share price that collapsed due to bad management.
Nil...
so the truth finally comes out after all the bs timetables of the last several years.
"Murch hopes that in the next two to three years, a successful Stratellite prototype will be unveiled to the world."
This is why I do carry a grudge against the former team. They were indeed over promotional. You reep what you sow, if you don't like it, don't do it.
I had read it to mean that the relationship (generically speaking) formerly as a director would be maintained by her new status as a consultant.
However, it can be read both ways.
"Dr. Muntz will maintain her relationship with the Company as a consultant."
Was the consulting relationship pre-existing (and also ongoing) and that is why she resigned; because it was and would be a conflict of interest with her status as an independent director?
A different take that just occured to me.
Here is a translation of corp speak, as I understand it:
"He or she did not have enough time" is code for "He or she left of their own accord."
"He or she will do consulting work" is code for "This individual and Globetel (or whomever) continue to have a good business relationship."
I think the reason they don't say so in those terms is because the corporation is speaking of the business relationship of an individual to the corporation. Corporations don't have the feelings and perceptions that individuals do. So an announcement of the business of the corporation does not attempt to do it from the perspective of the individual involved. Rather from the perspective of the corporation; the bottom line is the person does not have the time for it, the real reason is irrelevant to the corporation and trying to describe the real reason will probably result in a mistake of some kind.
Similarly, for the consulting reference, if this individual does work for the corporation then the corporation will pay for it, as apposed to some negative outcome, in which case proabably nothing would be said at all.
Renae got at least one fact wrong (Lockheed not developing an airship we know of since government funding cut in January) but an interesting analysis:
http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=342948&Category=23
Military Taking Another Look at Blimps
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post
WASHINGTON — In the era of $300 million fighter jets, satellite-guided rockets and complicated battlefield computer networks, Multimax Inc. is trying to revive an old-fashioned technology to thrust the information technology firm onto the front line. The Largo, Md., company has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on this new project, the design looks like an elliptical UFO, but the result will be familiar: It’s a blimp.
“It is somewhat uncharted waters” for the firm, said Ron Oholendt, a retired Air Force colonel and the program manager. The company has enlisted help from NASA and scientists at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, which is analyzing the design, and last year began hunting for support from the Pentagon, Department of Homeland Security or the Director of National Intelligence. With $14 million, the company could finish building and test a prototype for its airship, which they call the Maxflyer, Oholendt said. The company plans to submit a proposal for the system with the Homeland Security Department on Friday, he said.
Multimax is one of several defense companies pouncing on the military’s renewed interest in using high-flying, unmanned, helium-filled balloons — sometimes tied to the ground with a long rope — as possible weapons. Lockheed Martin Corp. is developing a blimp that it says will reach an altitude of 65,000 feet, while Raytheon Co. is developing one designed to reach 10,000 feet and be tethered to the ground. Blackwater USA, better known as one of the largest security contractors in Iraq, expects to finish its prototype, which aims to reach an altitude of 5,000 feet to 15,000 feet, in December.
The military’s interest is driven by a search for cheap alternatives to satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones. Some low-flying versions are already in Iraq, Afghanistan and along the U.S.-Mexico border. The blimps are known as airships or aerostats, a type that is tethered to the ground, and can stay up longer than the unmanned aerial vehicles popularized by the Iraq war and are cheaper than military satellites that can take years to launch, supporters of the technology say.
“They can stay aloft very efficiently for long periods of times,” said Col. Jeff Souder, product manager for an Army program. An airship is “somewhere around five to seven times less expensive than a manned aircraft per hour, and it would be greatly less expensive than satellites.”
The market is still small, but analysts say it could develop into a multibillion-dollar industry if the technology can survive the pitfalls that led to its initial demise, including being shot down by enemy gunfire or falling prey to damage by bad weather. “They make a heck of a big target in the sky, but it’s possible they could have communications, missile-detection and other applications,” said Michel Merluzeau, director of military airborne systems at Frost & Sullivan Inc., a research firm. “They still make a very big blip on a radar screen, so you can’t put them too close to the enemy.”
The experiment harkens back to the military’s use of blimps to hunt for submarines on the East and West coasts during World War II, historians say. “In the ’20s or ’30s, the Navy would send them out ahead of battleships to find the enemy and radio back,” said Jack Green of the Naval Historical Center. “They would go out for days and possibly weeks.”
Good points that I had considered. The delays would be another correction function that is standard operating procedure. Given the strat's position and the characteristics of the equipment, it becomes a known quantity. If the satellite or satellites are below the horizon, as when artillery may be snugged up against a ridge or hidden in a bunker, then a specific sky window may be required.
Course correcting artillery that relies on GPS would need a terrain flattening, signal boosting relay (stratellite-like platform) to be robust for military use, imo. Not to mention all the other data based systems they talk about these days. Raytheon is self funding development in these areas:
Raytheon Completes Closed-Loop Firings of Course Correcting Fuze Solution
2007-03-15 18:12:52 -
TUCSON, Ariz., March 15, 2007 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon Company test-fired five 155 mm artillery projectiles with low-cost course correcting fuzes that successfully demonstrated Global Positioning System signal acquisition, determination of a navigation solution and deployment of control surfaces designed to modify the projectiles' trajectory and increase ballistic accuracy.
(Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20070315/CLTH028)
The closed-loop firing tests were accomplished with an M198 towed howitzer from a range of 20 kilometers (13.5 miles) at Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz., last month.
The inability to control all the variables that shape a projectile's ballistic trajectory affects the accuracy of cannon artillery, which results in range error. A course correcting fuze applies a level of control to these variables to increase accuracy.
The new fuze fits into the wells of existing 105 mm and 155 mm artillery projectiles. It provides greatly increased accuracy by receiving GPS signals and modifying the rounds' in-flight trajectory through the deployment of small, ballistic-altering surfaces.
"This closed-loop test successfully met all objectives and provides us with a significant step forward in the development of this program," said Stephen Bennett, Raytheon CCF program manager. "The successful test of the course correcting fuze builds on Raytheon's strength for providing precision- guided artillery munitions."
Using internal funding, Raytheon is developing its course correcting fuze to meet the requirements of the U.S. Army's competitive Precision Guidance Kit program that currently is in the technology demonstration phase. Raytheon's course correcting fuze continues to demonstrate the ability to significantly improve the accuracy of existing ballistic unitary and cargo 155 mm and 105 mm artillery rounds with the addition of a low-cost, GPS-guided fuze kit.
Raytheon's Missile Systems business in Tucson, Ariz., will serve as the prime systems integrator, airframe designer and guidance and control authority, using L3 KDI Precision Products, Inc., to produce the all-up "smart fuze" kit at its automated fuze factory in Cincinnati, Ohio. KDI's proven experience with manufacturing more than 208,000 Multi-Option Fuze for artillery fuzes for the Army will help to ensure low production cost for Precision Guidance Kit.
Raytheon Company, with 2006 sales of $20.3 billion, is an industry leader in defense and government electronics, space, information technology, technical services, and business and special mission aircraft. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs more than 80,000 people worldwide.
Contact:
Everett Tackett, APR
520.360.8527
http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20070315/CLTH028" mime-type="application/octet-stream"/>
Photo: NewsCom: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20070315/CLTH028
AP Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org/
PRN Photo Desk, photodesk@prnewswire.com
Source: Raytheon Company
Press release: www.pr-inside.com
Kontaktinformation: e-mail
The Globetel picture is shaping up to be very similar to the former volatility of yesteryear. Several nebulous 'agreements', if that's what they are, combined with aggressive pumping and bashing on the boards; but nothing concrete to anchor sentiment.
The resulting hysteresous between blind optimism and disappointed despair makes for a juicy opportunity for traders knowing the correct channels to sail in. This is the weather I see coming, but it is only my opinionated forecast.
Raytheon making good headway in getting FAA clearances for UAV's. They are on a roll:
http://digital50.com/news/items/PR/2007/03/15/CLTH030/five-raytheon-cobra-unmanned-aircraft-systems-...
TUCSON, Ariz., March 15, 2007 PRNewswire — Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) in one day received Experimental Airworthiness Certificates from the Federal Aviation Administration for three of its Cobra Unmanned Aircraft Systems, bringing the certified Cobra fleet total to five.
The Experimental Airworthiness Certificates allow Raytheon's flight operations to continue in compliance with recently published FAA policy on unmanned aircraft operations in the National Airspace System.
Cobra is a low-cost, highly reliable unmanned system designed to support Raytheon's development, integration and test of unmanned systems technologies. The aircraft has a wingspan of 10 feet and is 9-feet long. The certification permits Cobra flight operations in a specified section of the National Airspace in Southeastern Arizona. It also authorizes Raytheon to conduct research and development, crew training and market surveys using the Cobra system.
The Cobra Unmanned Aircraft System integrates advanced systems and capabilities from several Raytheon businesses, including Tucson-based Missile Systems; Intelligence and Information Systems (IIS), based in Garland, Texas; Space and Airborne Systems in El Segundo, Calif.; and McKinney, Texas-based Network Centric Systems. The Cobra test bed will be used to support the development, test and demonstration of sensor systems; networked command, control and communications systems; and unmanned aircraft system architectural concepts.
Raytheon Company, with 2006 sales of $20.3 billion, is an industry leader in defense and government electronics, space, information technology, technical services, and business and special mission aircraft. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs more than 80,000 people worldwide.
Contact: Sara Hammond 520.794.7810
SOURCE Raytheon Company
nerd..so if I take your meaning correctly, if it turned out to actually be insider information, I would not be breaking the law since I didn't know where it actually came from, even though I believed it was insider info?
I am not trying to challenge anything, really just asking.
Nerd...So if we (the readers of the board) trade on it are we breaking the law?
In case we need a good source for solar cells:
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-15-2007/0004546943&...
United Solar Ovonic Awarded $9.1 Million Contract From Air Force Research Laboratory
The contract will continue funding the development of lightweight and high-
efficiency solar cells and solar modules for airship and space applications
AUBURN HILLS, Mich., March 15 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- United Solar
Ovonic LLC, the world leader in thin-film amorphous-silicon solar
technology and a wholly owned subsidiary of Energy Conversion Devices, Inc.
(ECD Ovonics) (Nasdaq: ENER), announced today that the Air Force Research
Laboratory (AFRL) in Kirtland AFB, New Mexico, has exercised an 18-month
contractual option for $9.1 million with United Solar Ovonic to develop new
solar cell technology to be used in space and airship vehicles addressing
defense and homeland security applications.
Today's announcement builds upon the success of earlier contracts with
the Air Force. Since May 2003, United Solar Ovonic has been working with
the Advanced Space Power Generation Group in the Space Vehicles Directorate
of AFRL to develop ultralightweight solar arrays on thin stainless steel
foils and polymers for use in space and airship vehicles. Solar cells on
thin stainless steel foil are already being tested in AFRL experimental
missions such as TacSat-2 satellite, which was launched in December, 2006.
UNI-SOLAR(R) space photovoltaic (PV) products offer an ultralight, low-
cost alternative to conventional space PV modules made of crystalline
silicon or gallium arsenide. UNI-SOLAR(R) triple-junction modules,
originally developed for terrestrial applications, are made of amorphous
silicon-based thin-film alloys, which are deposited on a 5-mil flexible
stainless steel substrate. By utilizing a polymeric substrate, space cells
have already been developed that have a specific power greater than 1000
Watts per kilogram (W/kg), which is significantly higher than what is
currently available. A high specific power is required for airship
application. The radiation hardness and superior high-temperature
performance of amorphous silicon make it an attractive material for space
application.
"Next generation solar arrays for Air Force missions need to be
cheaper, lighter and more stowable than what are currently available," said
John Merrill, Program Manager of the AFRL Advanced Power Generation Program
at Kirtland AFB. "We are impressed with the work that United Solar Ovonic
has been carrying out under AFRL contracts to address these goals."
"We are delighted to collaborate with AFRL to develop products for this
rapidly expanding market," said Subhendu Guha, President and Chief
Operating Officer of United Solar Ovonic. "The new funding will accelerate
our commercial goal of supplying solar cells for satellite and airship
applications."
About United Solar Ovonic
United Solar Ovonic, building on technology invented and pioneered by
ECD Ovonics, is the world leader in thin-film amorphous photovoltaics.
Because of characteristics unique to the United Solar Ovonic solar cell
technology, such as lightweight, ruggedness and flexibility, it is ideal as
building-integrated photovoltaic roofing systems for residential and
industrial customers. ECD Ovonics and United Solar Ovonic hold the basic
patents covering the continuous roll-to-roll manufacturing of thin-film
amorphous-silicon alloy multi-junction solar cells and related products.
More information is available at http://www.uni-solar.com.
This release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning
of the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform
Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements are based on assumptions which
ECD Ovonics, as of the date of this release, believes to be reasonable and
appropriate. ECD Ovonics cautions, however, that the actual facts and
conditions that may exist in the future could vary materially from the
assumed facts and conditions upon which such forward-looking statements are
based. The risk factors identified in the ECD Ovonics filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, including the company's most recent
Annual Report on Form 10-K, could impact any forward-looking statements
contained in this release.
SOURCE United Solar Ovonic LLC
Is this one of those "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" kinds of deals?
If you wish to interpret it that 'in conjunction with' does not mean on the same premises, then you obviously may, but that does not make an interpretation that they were there necessarily wrong.
risk..I doubt that Raytheon is looking for any free publicity from Globetel, so if their name were to be used in a PR without Raytheon's written approval, they would probably slap Globetel into court tomorrow morning.
In conjunction with this test, representatives of Raytheon Company presented a range of additional security solutions involving synthetic aperture radars (SAR), infrared (IR) cameras, and secure communications.
This is probably obvious, but the use of the word 'additional' is kind of interesting. It shows the writer was operating under the impression that the strat was presented as a security solution that day. I would have said the focus was on testing the motors and that the intended purpose of the strat is as a communications platform.
A small observation that shows a shift.
BareBax..their's means money for them, ours doesn't mean money for us. Nothing concrete in it.
A mid level stratellite would be ideal for laser spotting targets in enemy territory where there are no ground troops to do it.
http://dmnnewswire.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=114227
TUCSON, Ariz., March 14, 2007 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) successfully conducted the first beyond-line-of-sight mission using a dual- mode imaging infrared/digital semi-active laser seeker on its Mid-Range Munition, Chemical-Energy guided projectile.
The test firing from an M1A2 Abrams tank March 1 at Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz., demonstrated the projectile's ability to successfully acquire laser designation and transition the tracking function to the imaging infrared sensor against a T-72 tank target. The sensor guided the munition to a direct hit at a distance of 5.2 kilometers (3.5 miles).
The dual-mode seeker demonstrated its most flexible mode that exploits sensor fusion. During off-set designation mode, the Mid-Range Munition, Chemical-Energy seeker first uses the laser spot to mark near the intended target, and then using sensor fusion, the imaging infrared seeker autonomously finds the qualified target closest to the laser spot.
Advertisement
"The round hit within inches of the aim point, demonstrating complete mission success," said Rick Williams, Raytheon Mid-Range Munition program manager. "Mid-Range Munition, Chemical-Energy has demonstrated all required operational modes."
The Raytheon Mid-Range Munition, Chemical-Energy projectile is designed to provide the U.S. Army with lethal, one-shot capability as the service continues its transformation to lighter, more deployable combat forces. The Mid-Range Munition, Chemical-Energy, which will autonomously attack battlefield targets at beyond-line-of-sight ranges, with or without external laser target designation, is a key component of the Army's Future Combat Systems vehicles.
"This team, composed of members from Picatinny Arsenal, Raytheon and General Dynamics-OTS, is the first to have met all the performance and testing requirements of the U.S. Army dual-mode, Mid-Range Munition Science and Technology Demonstration program," said Ken Pedersen, Raytheon vice president of Advanced Programs. "This final test demonstrates Mid-Range Munition's high level of functional maturity; it is a direct indication that Mid-Range Munition is ready to enter system design and development."
The Mid-Range Munition, Chemical-Energy program is jointly developed and managed by U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center and Project Manager - Maneuver Ammunition Systems at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J.
Raytheon Company, with 2006 sales of $20.3 billion, is an industry leader in defense and government electronics, space, information technology, technical services, and business and special mission aircraft. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs more than 80,000 people worldwide.
One hour ago:
http://www.rfglobalnet.com/content/news/article.asp?DocID=%7BAD8C4A41-2E9D-48B4-AA68-F8B7CA7F905D%7D...
Raytheon To Pursue U.S. Air Force $160 Million Upgrade For GPS Control Segment
3/14/2007 Aurora, CO -- Raytheon Company will lead an industry team in pursuit of the next generation Global Positioning System Control Segment (OCX), a program to provide command, control, and mission support for current GPS Block II and III satellites as well as support to existing and new interfaces. The initial selection of two competitors is scheduled for late fiscal year 2007.
The OCX program is valued at $160 million and is administered by the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, Calif.
"Raytheon has more than 35 years of control system expertise and is a lead supplier for most top satellite providers," said Charles "Chuck" Enoch, vice president of Space Systems for Raytheon Intelligence and Information Systems business. Enoch added, "We have the proven technology already being used in many key military and civil programs."
The GPS OCX program will revolutionize GPS command and control and mission capabilities to refocus GPS operations from satellite command and control to user- oriented, effects-based operations.
The new control system will fully support GPS III and legacy satellites and focus on military transformational and civil needs across the globe, including advanced anti-jam capabilities, improved system security, accuracy and reliability. Additionally, GPS OCX will be based on a modern service-oriented architecture that will integrate government and industry open system standards.
Since they are serious about cutting expenses, this is the way to do it. They seem like suitable facilities for the purpose. Just be sure to book the conference room well in advance.
It does compensate well for those who sat in fine surroundings while the company went down.
The K-men may not be pretty to look at, but they do appear to be hard-nosed (good) businessmen.
Is he invested in Globetel?
100% contributed capital means 100% ownership of the Company from what I can see. There are many ways to borrow money, whomever lends it to Globetel will presumably be repaid from Globetel's share of the JV revenues. (if revenues are poor, there will need to be some other equity stake for the lender to collect on) This will defer profits down the road for Globetel until such time as they would maybe pay it off from proceeds coming from some other big deal somewhere else in the world.
It appears that Globetel has negotiated a 'first right of refusal' for ownership of a JV in return for being the vendor of a product that VPN feels is best obtained through them.
Interesting that this basis for consideration appears to be under attack this weekend.
All imo.
For now I am limiting my scope to the build out (pre-operations revenue) phase, as I do not really know how to term the accounting of those revenues.
GTEM does not have the equipment sitting in a warehouse somewhere so they have not yet paid for it out of their own books yet. It appears they are going to invoice for it and get money out of the Company (from VPN payments into the Company) then manufacture and deliver it.
Ok, so at that point GTEM has sold equipment to the Company and for the sake of illustration is on the outside as a vendor looking in. GTEM's books show expenses, revenues and profits for that transaction.
Now the company says "we just paid this much for this equipment with money that VPN put into the pot. Now we need x amount to finish the project, bringing the total to x plus the amount we already spent on buying equipment from Globetel, the vendor. Here's the total GTEM, to get your share of the Company, you shall pay in 49% of that total."
Now GTEM must come up with that money. They must use cash on hand (from previous, hopefully profitable transactions with the Company and/or others) plus borrowed money to come up with it. Will they have the cash or will they have to borrow money? What's your opinion? Mine is borrow money.
glow...the parties pay capital in proportion to their ownership in the Company (JV):
"2.3 FUNDING. The Parties shall provide to the Company the working capital
necessary for the construction of the Project Networks and any other funds
required for the operation of the business of such Project Networks
proportionally to the Parties ownership in the Company in terms of Clause 3.1
below as agreed herein. The amount of such funding shall be set forth in the
Initial Plan, the initial draft of which is attached hereto as Schedule 2.2 The
Parties agree to cooperate in good faith and as quickly as practicable to agree
upon a definitive business plan, and until that plan is finished the Initial
Plan shall control."
Globetel will be paid by the Company for their equipment, but how much profit that transaction with the Company will yield for GTEM is not known. Assuming equipment is 49% or less of the cost of the project (likely imo), GTEM would still have to capitalize, for their ownership share of the Company, an amount equal to their own equipment overhead and development costs, plus percentage (all shown on their invoice to the Company for the equipment) plus the difference between that and 49% of the project cost.
"A. In recognition of the development costs incurred by GlobeTel, GlobeTel
shall sell the latest version of the HotZone technology and supporting equipment
to the Company at cost plus [***] percent ([***]%). The foregoing on the
understanding that such [***] percent ([***]%) shall be paid by the Company
exclusively during the first [***] ([***]) months following the date of
incorporation of the Company. For purposes hereof, cost shall mean: the cost
shown in the invoice issued by the vendor of the equipment plus any taxes and/or
expenses, directly related to the purchase of the equipment minus any credits
and/or discounts granted by the vendor, directly related to the purchase of the
equipment"
The only out would be a sweetheart deal where VPN lets them show exorbitant profits and/or development costs and allows them to go on paper as having fulfilled their share, but since when do Peralta's give away money? So they are in for substantial debt to execute this JV. If I were VPN, I would be watching for them to default, then I'd grab the equipment for a settlement and cut them out of the JV. Hence the risk for GTEM if they let VPN (or anyone) finance their share.
In other words, their role as vendor is isolated from their role as part owner of the Company. Any equipment that is supplied to the Company (from GTEM or others) has to be capitalized by the Owners of the company, even if an owner is also a vendor.
all imo.
Yes at this stage the 8k is meaningless as a value added contract, as we know and as was confirmed by the market's absolute discounting of it's existence. It just has more detail than the typical LOI announcement.
The actual terms must be very tough. Clearly GTEM does not have the capital, so I am wondering if it may involve (and here is the blind speculation you refer to) financing of GTEM's share by VPN itself to be repayed from future revenues. This would be very risky to be sure, but at least GTEM would have a major installation under their belt and some credibility back. Maybe that's worth taking a few in the shorts.
I do not look for any price action until gold hits the till and if they are plunging into debt, that could be a while.
For a dissapointed shareholder such as myself, the new management has shown understanding and action in support of my point of view.
Even if it is eyewash at least they know what business is supposed to look like. I don't believe it is eyewash though. We apparently have independent confirmation of the Mexico deal as legit, and as said by others, deadwood being replaced with producers. These changes have brought the closest thing to a meaty contract I've ever seen from Globetel.
Vern says we're gonna get our lunches eaten. That is the liability going in, but at least we're in, and I'm sure Vern and his hard driving father have dealt with their fair share of sharks right here at home. We have to watch our backs and don't get into situations we don't know how to get out of.
So full speed ahead, I say. It sure beats sitting around waiting for deadlines to pass and reading meaningless LOI's.
ok, got that wrong, do you also feel that we would not have had the run up that we did have two years ago if we had been on the pinks and not on the OTCBB?
sinful...during the run up that I am referring to two years ago we were on the pinks, I know because I bought in at the time, then we went to amex. There was no institutional prior to amex either. That is why I referenced that time period, because it is quite parallel to where we are now. You have a point with SEC and that is no doubt another factor, but one that is a manifestation of the root cause I refer to.