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.
Per the depo, CLYW had a $500M contract with China.com and $2.5M in cash for Daic to make the contract happen and... absolutely nothing was accomplished because of infighting. Makes me sick to my stomach.
Pretty clear. The former CLYW management was a racket involved in patent suppression, perhaps with the involvement of other parties. The Judge's ruling makes that explicit. You decide who is the guilty. Only with the company destroyed could these faux, unelected, illegitimate "managers" steal the patent and keep it for themselves. CLYW started as a scam that suddenly had a property worth billions. Of COURSE they tried to steal that for themselves. That's over now with a Receiver appointed and a judge that knows what's going on. The final battle has now been joined. Sell the patents for pennies or sell them for mucho bucks and make the shareholders whole for once. I am sure that the judge will not allow the patents to be sold for bupkis. In the meantime, we will be assaulted, both from without and within, by those determined to be come rich at our expense. Ain't gonna happen! Criminal prosecution of former "management" seems likely. Yes!
We disagree. Have a nice day.
Yes, the missing $37M is indeed an interesting issue.
I hope you're correct.
Good point. The CLYW case against TM has been dismissed with prejudice -- it can never be brought again by CLYW because Turrini and his fellow crooks made no attempt to pursue it despite telling people at the forum that they were (lie number 456?) But under a receiver, perhaps the case can be pursued since CLYW is no longer an operating entity.
SirH, as I read the brief, the judge has dismissed the case with prejudice.
>>Also - even if this lawsuit were to be dismissed that doesn't preclude refiling against them (depending on what type of dismissal anyway), or filing against other infringers.
What's to stop the Reciever (assuming he has access to the details of the agreement that the board rejected) from making a counter-offer to sell the rigthts to T-mobile? Or to hire contingency lawyers to go against this? <<
The case was dismissed with prejudice. That means it can never be filed again. CLYW can never try to get a dime from TM. Way to go, Turrini.
Astonishing. Turrini and his fellow bums never pursued this case despite lying to all us shareholders that he was. The only bright light: Drago gets 28% of NOTHING. Also note the timing of the order -- nine days after receivership began. Another huge missed opportunity because of past management.
Good luck to you, too. It will be an exciting year, one way or another.
>>He also ordered the company to pay IN ADVANCE the receivers expenses which he dam well knows based on testimony they don't have it. I'm not a share holder anymore nor do I plan to purchase any unless the ruling is reversed and justice is served. I see no justice here, just a big misruling. That is my opinion based on my research of the law and what transpired. If you make some money and I miss out than so be it. <<
As you note, there is no money to pay the Receiver, so he becomes a creditor, to be paid from the sale of the Patent. He is thus further motivated to get the most money he can from the patents. And as you say you are no longer a shareholder... why are you here?
>>There remains risk. But it is a calculated risk just like it has been for the last few years. No worse than it has been, possibly a bit better.
Are you kidding? We had no chance of seeing a dime when Turrini and his Merry Band of Felons took control. Now, Turrini and the rest have been thrown-out into the street, face first. Experienced court-appointed receivers have seen all this before. The Judge ordered the Receiver to dissolve the company but making sure shareholders get the most money possible for their shares. As they say in Business School, that's "goodness."
I find it impossible to believe that longs with an average pps of several pennies will lose. I am much more optimistic. This isn't the first US corporation dissolved and the crapbums who were running it the most mendacious (although they have to be close). If the Patent is worth even $100M, that's 50 cents a share before creditors are paid, and the Receiver gets to judge who is a real creditor. $300M and it's $1.50 a share. The Daic $117M + interest judgment is gone. Yes, it may take another year, but after the last eight years, so what? To leave us shareholders with nothing, the Patent would have to be sold for $20M. Ain't gonna happen.
HAHAHA! Good response.
You lose. The Judge ordered the Receiver to get the most money possible for the shareholders. We're on to your posts.
The Judge ordered the Receiver to get the most money possible for shareholders.
A web search reveals nothing regarding receivership and what has happened in the past two weeks. How strange.
>>Based on one of our existing products, on the average, for an outdoor (line of sight) environment with no obstacle, the range is about 250 to 300 feet.
This can't be right. Such limitations would render the network useless.
1. The Judge appears to have ruled the secret settlement is valid, even though no stockholders know what's in it. How does this best maximize the value of the shareholders' investment?
2. Does the Receiver have the power to force Daic to give-up the patent through alternative remedies, including criminal prosecution?
Years ago I was involved in a bloodbath with an unbelievably abusive manager at work. She stole money from her people. She drove one guy to commit suicide and another into a mental hospital. She graded every one of her people "unsatisfactory" and tried to get us all fired. It was like being in a bad horror movie. I was the only one in the group to take this to senior management. I was punished because management could not believe she was that bad a supervisor. I documented her abuses and finally made her back down, but even then, senior management labeled me a "whining malcontent."
I am reminded of this experience as we go under the power of the Receiver. Knowing nothing about him, I fear we are in a similar situation -- that he is simply unprepared to believe the degree of corruption, lies, and fraud that is the normal operating procedure of the now former company officers. I'll be interested to see if he has any response to Turrini's last 8K in that it is to be used to officially inform the world of what has happened most recently to CLYW.
Yeah, but did the receiver authorize a fraudulent 8K in that Turrini misstated/omitted facts?
>>"If Mr. Diac does not comply, the Receiver has the power to enforce the settlement agreement. Having seen the company's officers and directors at trial, I believe the Receiver can do so more efficiently and effectively than they could."
If Daic does not comply with what? What is the source of this statement, and how does it effect the apparently fraudulent settlement of August/December?
I disagree.
I'll reply anyway, thank you. I think DSU is on the ball.
>>What was the volume in the afternoon trade, anyway ?
Down from .03 to .015 on about 11,700 shares -- about $350. I had not considered the possibility that the insider crooks with fraudulently issued shares might be trying to unload them at any cost before the Receiver declares the shares were issued unlawfully.
Turrini? CEO on 16 February? WTF? Is he trying to create an insanity defense?
You mean holders of fraudulently issued shares that may be declared toilet paper by the receiver? 8*)
>>"Some of them..."
Now I get it. Like the tens of millions of non-existent, non-authorized, fraudulent shares issued to certain nameless officers and associated crooks...
The government did not allocate a spectrum for LS. They OKed a trial to see if the technology worked without degrading any other existing system. It doesn't. The UHF freqs involved deal exclusively with line-of-sight transmissions, which is the universe in which satellite comm works. It may also be true that LS's band would degrade some other government systems the Feds don't want to talk about. One way or another, it's LS's screw-up. They bet the farm on bulldozing their way to approval. They failed. That our technology may allow them to continue as a business is very important and an absolute reason not to let the court sell the patents for pennies on the dollar.
Oh, please! I assume you are joking. How can 'canceling the shares' work with the Judge's order to "maximize the value of the shares"?
You're confused. I have no investment in LightSquared. I am interested in LS because I am a navigator/pilot a la GPS. I am interested in our patent being LS's solution to their now dead architecture. That would be a big win-win.
Relax, people. The PPS at the moment means nothing. Today, the sale of $351 worth of shares dropped the pps from .03 to .015. Keep perspective. Until we hear from the Receiver, the daily PPS fluctuations serve only to serve as a proxy Turrini -- something to make us crazy. The judge ordered the receiver to tell all of us at least ten days before any actions he plans to take. In the world of CLYW, ten days is an eternity.
The $4.5B LightSquared Ground Station to Satellite-based Architecture is Dead.
==============================================================
Roberts Applauds Decision to Protect GPS
The FCC decision is important to public safety and many Kansas industries ranging from aviation to agriculture.
Reporter: From 13 News, Posted by Ralph Hipp
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) who has led the charge to protect public safety, aviation, military and precision agriculture uses of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) from potential harmful interference today hailed the decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reject a plan to create a new wireless network because it would have interfered with the GPS signal.
“Any Kansan with a GPS in his or her car was going to be affected by the interference this conflicting network posed,” said Roberts. “This is a particularly big win for public safety as well as precision agriculture, aviation and other industries critical to the Kansas economy that rely on seamless GPS communication.
“I’m pleased the FCC has agreed with my concerns and taken measures to block LightSquared's proposed network due to dangerous interference with GPS. While I remain committed to the continued expansion of broadband networks, there was simply too much at stake with this proposal that put our public and national security at risk. It would have been irresponsible to allow any network to interfere with a system so important to moving goods, defending our homeland and feeding the world.”
FCC’s decision late yesterday followed extensive testing by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and other agencies, which concluded deployment of the LightSquared network would have caused irreparable harm to GPS dependent industries, such as aviation, defense, personal location devices and agriculture, because the spectrum used by LightSquared is adjacent to the spectrum used by GPS.
Senator Roberts worked with many Kansas companies and associations in this effort including Garmin, John Deere & Company, Case New Holland, FedEx, UPS, National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), National Rural Electric Cooperatives Association, Caterpillar, Agricultural Retailers Association, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials among others.
In May 2011, Sen. Roberts and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) sent a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, asking him to take all necessary steps to protect GPS.
In November of last year, Sen. Roberts introduced an amendment to prohibit the FCC from using any appropriated funds to allow LightSquared to build out a broadband network until the agency could prove the expansion will not interfere with GPS. Similar legislation, championed by Congressman Yoder, was signed into law as part of the consolidated Appropriations Bill.
I have been buying through Scottrade, but you have to do it over the phone with your broker.
LightSquared needs our patent now more than ever. However, Bloomberg reported that Obama invested $55,000 in LightSquared when he was a senator.
==========================================================
FCC To Suspend LightSquared Plans
The FCC will indefinitely suspend LightSquared's authority to carry terrestrial broadband signals on frequencies close to GPS frequencies after receiving a report that concludes the two systems cannot currently coexist. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) wrote (PDF) the FCC on Tuesday saying there was no immediate solution to interference problems found in testing GPS units in the presence of the types of signals that LightSquared is proposing. The FCC conditionally allowed LightSquared to use frequency bands it owned adjacent to the GPS bands provided it could prove the broadband wouldn't step on GPS. A year of testing demonstrated serious and widespread interference according to NTIA. LightSquared says it "profoundly disagrees" with those findings and was fighting to have the FCC rule in its favor right up until the decision was announced. The battle isn't officially over yet.
According to PC World, the FCC was planning to issue a public notice of its intentions on Wednesday and will seek public comment on its plan and the NTIA's conclusions. The NTIA did leave a crack in the door by saying it would like to work with the FCC and industry to tackle the interference problems so that spectrum can be freed up to be used for broadband. LightSquared hasn't said what it intends to do with the decision which will effectively cancel its plans for a $14 billion high speed wireless system.
>>Why anyone would sell their shares at this point is beyond me.
The sellers are the same people that tear-up their lottery tickets before the drawing so they won't have to think about losing.
Inductive reasoning. As good as any other on this Board.
Shouldn't be a problem.
>>the ruling today,
What ruling??
>>I believe the argument can be made that, if we have three years to wind down the company, we should continue to pursue the T-Mobile litigation with a contingency attorney. That settles the Diac issue (he gets his 28%) and puts us in a better situation to ultimately sell the patent.
If the receiver decides that this "settlement" was done in bad faith or the result of fraud, the "settlement" may be nothing of the sort.