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.
LOL..I know why you gave up. In the best case scenario with gross margins high and operating costs at a minimum you would need about a half billion in revenue to make 20 million net profit. And we know NEOMs gross margins arent great at the moment, and their operating costs are pretty high so you probably need to double that number to get 20 million net profit.
BEAM.I never said they would appear as an operating expense. They are a deduction on the financials and thats what I said. The financials includes the cash flow statement, the operations statement and the the balance sheet. Those 3 together are the financial statements of the company. As I said go find the post where I said they would be on the operating statement, as opposed to my saying they would be on the financial statement. But ironically enough they are on the operating statement. By the way the dividends for the Series C preferred are not only listed on page 3 on the cash flow statement, they are also on page 2 titled "CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS" So they are in fact listed as an accredited operating expense as well as a cash flow accredited expense. Here is the entry on page 2 showing it was deducted when calculating the loss per share on operations.......Accretion of dividends on convertible preferred stock (137 ) .....
And again what is bringing up this old issue have to do with what we were discussing this week?
First of all I dont know what any of this has to do with this weeks discussion? Secondly the dividends did appear on the Q1 Financial statement on page 3. Matter of fact they are listed twice and just goes to show how inept those filing these forms are.
Accretion of dividends on Series C Convertible Preferred Stock 137
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=4423414&Type=HTML
But again what does any of this have to do with this weeks discussion, where you unsolicited, posted how you never said preferred stock was a better financing mechanism, and I posted your quotes where you did in fact make that statement?
We werent talking about selling common stock to Cornell in May, the SEDA wasnt even filed. We were talking about the 27 million funding they recieved for the preferred series C so i dont understand what in the world you are talking about on that one. The only common stock sold to Cornell at that times was in the form of warrants, and no one was discussing that as the new financing. The financing was the preferred stock and it did increase NEOMs interest expense.
Beam11..that was not my argument at the time. I said they would appear on the financials and you said they wouldnt. But thats beside the point.
The real issue is what you stated then and continue to state. You say in those May posts, just before the financials were released, that the new financing was better then the old equity financing. You have also stated that there was no interest in the new financing. At the time of those posts, the new financing that you claim was arranged in 2005 to buy the subs, was not in fact arranged in 2005. It was the sale of the preferred series C stock in 2006, which paid for those subs.
I think somehow you got the 2005 SEDA and the preferred crossed, or how could you state the new financing would lower interest expenses? Exactly the opposite is the case, the preferred financing has increased NEOMs interest expense at a rate of 8 percent on the 27 million dollars. You also made reference to them being debt free, in those posts. The 27 million dollars in series C is a debt until or if the series C are ever converted. Thats why if NEOM defaults on that agreement they have to repay Cornell the entire 27 million and the interest accrued. The SEDA however is different. There is no interest on the SEDA, when and if the shares get registered. NEOM sells them shares at a set formula, and in return NEOM raises cash to operate with, unlike the series C that NEOM has to pay interest on. Here is what you said in May, and the dividedend were in fact on the financial statement when it was released, as was the interest, both you claimed would not appear on the financials period. Where are you getting this I said they would be an operating expense? Please provide the post as I have done for you showing what you said. I said they would be on the financials, and are a part of the stockholders equity.
"""""""When the 3/31/2006, Q-1 is presented, perhaps you can show us in the financial statements all the dividends which we have paid to Cornell for the Convertable Preferred Stock, used as security, for funds advanced or issued in purchasing all the subsidiaries."""""""""""
EDOQ........No matter who prepared the filing, management should of known they cant file a S-3/A. The A is for amendment, meaning you have to have an S-3 on file to amend. They withdrew the S-3 they filed, so they cant ammend something that isnt there anylonger. The CEO who signed this filing should have realized that.
MM..give it a rest already. Of course if you call the PR or Investor Relations or the company headquarters, they are going to give you the old "everything is fine and dandy" story. Thats what they are paid to do. Everyone from The CEO on down to the pr dept, is paid to spin the company in a positive manner. If you cant sell the company, then you dont belong in business. And they have been doing a darn good job in selling it, both literally technically.
And if you are calling them every day as your posts indicate, no wonder they cant even get a darn filing done right.
Clawman, I believe your position at the time this was debated, was that NEOM didnt not fall under the new QP rules, because they were a penny stock. The new QP rules allowed companies to be more open during a QP and to disclose more info to the shareholders. It was your position and several others here as well, that NEOM fell under the older much more restrictive rules. One of your posts even contained a snyopsis that stated that nothing could be released that was not a part of the new filing or pertaining to the new filing?
I of course debated the opposite, and even used PRs from NEOM during the QP that contained forward looking statements, and many here claimed in their view those examples were not forward looking.
The new QP rules do allow companies to release material news during a QP, if its something they would do in mormal operating procedures and they have a history to show it. The old rules which you opined NEOM had to abide by is contained in your post 54910. Read all your posts of Jan 31st ont this issue, there are about 20.
Its interesting to see that you now agree with me that they can disclose material news, without restrictions.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=9489822
The IP isnt worth the market cap when the new shares become outstanding. What price are you putting on the IP? If its over 100 million dollars, with todays numbers, then thats too high. No one would even at this point and time consider a buy out for 200 million or more, which is what the market cap will be at very soon if the registration statement becomes effective, and Cornell exercises its cheapest warrants.
Blacky...a year from now the stock will be fine in a way. I have the feeling that if things dont turn around soon, with the huge float, you may see management asking at next years SHM for a RS to raise the pps and lower the float. Its coming, I just dont know when at this time.
However a year from now the technology will start going somewhere, and I dont think NEOM will be the big player in this arena, although they will capture a niche market. If we are lucky the pps will rebound to the .40 a share price sometime around mid next year in my opinion. I dont see it happening sooner, unless TOBIN can bring in a new wave of unwise investors to follow his pump. The financials will not be in place before then to support the higher pps.
No the QP does not relate to outside firms, that neom has no control over.
For Beam11s reference, I believe another of the 12 companies that licensed NEOMs PC was I-Point media, whose stock is now about worthless, and NEOM had to write off their investment with them as a loss, and we still dont have our dividend shares. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
Also I just put together the list of companies that either had an aliance of some sort with NEOM or licensed their technology dating back to beginning of 2003, based on their press releases. There are 19 companies, excluding anything from the newly acquired subs.........and these 18 didnt all license their PC, some just have marketing partnerships.
Seven Worldwide.......Nov. 03
SRP Consulting........Sept 03
Nextcode(LOI).........Dec 04
Aura Digital..........OCT 04
Ipoint................Sept 04
Airclic(lawsuit)......June 04
IPSO(check 21)........June 04
SAIC..................May 04
Relyco................Apr 04
Foote Cone Belding....Mar 05
Inactis(check 21).....Mar 05
IT Global.............Feb 05
Shelron...............Jan 05
E+I Marketing.........Jan 05
Deusto Systems........Jan 05
Jorge Christian+Part..Jan 05
Virgin(lawsuit).......June 05
Cellufun..............Sept 06
The way I read the SEC rules anything that will not cause the share price to change on any operation not included in the registration. But others here disagreed with my interpretation of the SEC rule and their opinion was they could not release any forward looking news that would effect the PPS. There was a big debate about it, where others pointed out I wasnt an attorney and some here were, so their interpretation was more valid then mine. So if thats true they cant release anything that would cause NEOM or any of the subs share price to change prior to the registration being declared effective. My interpretation is more liberal then that.
Thank you Steeler....Yes now that you mention the name it comes back to memory, and they did go bankrupt did they not?
MM who are you talking too? According to all the discussions here on SEC regs and quiet periods, and the past history with NEOM, a quiet period is mandatory when ever you file a registration statement to issue new shares, at least with respect to the operations included in the registration period. Heck last year the company was in a quiet period for over 9 months because they filed the BSDS registration statement.
I am a holder with over 100,000 shares at at this time. No I wont be a buyer. I wouldnt of been a buyer for the past 9 months either as I pointed out here since december 2005. Maybe when I feel its hit the real bottom I might average down, but not before.
I believe if you check the record, the company that had the 10 year 100 million deal with NEOM went bankrupt, as was posted here several times. Dont ask me the name, because I am not going back to research something for you thats been posted on this board by others a few times in the past 10 months. There was no LOI that was withdrawn it was a licensing agreement by the way.
Not true Beam11......I will post a couple of your quotes and let you go find the posts they came out of. A little hint: It was the same time period you were aggressively defending Fritz selling shares, and you stated construction was an emergency, something you now claim as well, you never did. Funny how now you state PIPES are in the end at a higher cost, and then you claimed they were not in a lengthy debate with me. These are direct quotes of yours copied and pasted, so dont suggest they are my spin please.
""""Convertable preferred stock is the most desirable form of financing with big VC's (in lieu of equity debt and bonds)"""""""
""""""Private Investment in Public Equity was the best and fastest way to purchase the subsidiaries""""""
"""""One positive comment, I can make about the Cornell Financing, is: The new financing will help NEOM become debt free,""""""
There are coorespondence also posted for 2005. You have to love this one where the SEC tells them to get their inconsistencies straightened out........
""""In addition, Exhibit 10.62
indicates
that the note is dated March 24, 2005 but your Form 8-K filed
April
1, 2005 indicates that the note is dated March 30, 2005. Please
correct this inconsistency.""""
And who said that a company cant divulge negotiations they might be involved in as acquisitions? When they are asking the shareholders to increase the number of shares they can issue, the SEC not only believes they can divulge this info, but the SEC also requires they divulge it..........."""""4. You indicate that one of the purposes you have for increasing
the
number of authorized shares is to enable you to pursue additional
strategic acquisitions. Revise to disclose whether you presently
have any plans, proposals or arrangements to issue any of the
newly
authorized shares of common stock to acquire additional
businesses.
If so, please disclose by including materially complete
descriptions
of the future acquisitions. If not, please state that you have no
such plans, proposals, or arrangements written or otherwise at
this
time to issue any of the additional authorized shares of common
stock.""""""
Also dont forget the other gloom no one is mentioning here. With a new S-3 filed how does anyone here think they will get news out of CTIA. Theres a new quiet period in effect and anything that would effect any of the companies whose shares are a part of that S-3 can not be discussed. And since all the acquired companies shares are in that S-3 I dont expect to hear much news for the near term, except anything that would be ordinary business. But then again some here have also argued that NEOM cant even announce ordinary business stuff as you may recall from the debates earlier this year during the other QP.
Beam11....lets set the record really straight. The article JP posted in May was a debate with you over financing. As you remember, in May as well you were one of the few here supporting the Cornell funding, even challenging JP on the issue, when he suggested a VC would be a better source of capital. You also stated in one post that the PIPE was a superior form of financing then the SEDA and most business preferred the PIPE. Non of you however, ever stated that Cornells arrangements were a form of death spiral. Matter of fact JPs article even states otherwise.
In August Cjzak in post number 83615 re-raised the issue. I was the only one who at that time stated that in my opinion Cornells financing was in fact a form of death spiral financing in post number 83647.
So yes JP posted that article in May, in a debate with you over financing. And ironically during that debate he made the statement that we would be under Cornells thumb for the unforseeable future. Then a short time later, he started posting how we were about done with Cornell.LOL. But the fact remains you and others claimed these PIPES were the best financing, over SEDAs, and the preferred stock last time I checked conversion price is tied to the market PPS and not a fixed price, thus a death spiral type arrangement.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=12626064
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=12630655
we know for a fact that one company that bought the license went out of business and couldnt fulfill its obligations under the 10 year contract. That has been discussed here many times. I believe there was also a second one who later backed out. And as you point out I said I BELIEVE a couple no longer exist. So thats an opinion or belief not a statement of fact. So instead of accepting my post as fact accept it as an opinion in which we know for certain that one of the two went belly up, and has been discussed here repeatedly. I believe they had a 10 year 100 million dollar agreement.
well let me see. Is it working for anything other then a 10 percent coupon from autoxperience? If not then why bother with it until it is something worth downloading to your mobile? Why not download the multiple applications that are working and can save you money instead? Sure there are some demo sites, whoop te do. Anyone ever tell you that you should never be the frirst to download and install new software? They ever suggest you wait and let others be the ginnea pigs working the bugs out? If all thats being offered is a 10 percent coupon for my auto if I happen to go to Florida, then I think I will wait a while as well.
Just more statements like this, with no public info to back them up..."""""Ang thats what I have been saying, they have the Service Provider, Carrier, Content Provider, MediaMogul and subsequent Brand Partners, etc."""""
I guess the mediamogul id the local paper.lol
What he dont say however is about all this competition rolling their products out the door successfully, like the one we read about here this morning. Just more hype and speculation that he has info the rest of us arent privy too.
Jonsie.all you have to do is go back and look at some of the other notable posts. Go back around january or so and you will find the following.
1. PC was live and ready to explode, and here we are 9 months later wondering when the launch will be.
2. By mid 06 we were supposed to be starting the climb back on nasdaq, and by fall 06 have a big foot up on relisting, and here is fall and we are at a 12 month low
3. Jan 20th last stop call for everyone to get on board or miss the run.........and here we are at lows.
I could go on and on, but these 3 posts are enough of an eye opener.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=9333732
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=9332987
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=9207406
Yup, 12 companies, and I believe a couple of them no longer exist. So where is that huge list of fortune 100 and 500 companies that have already paid for licensing? I am not asking you specifically, its a rhetorical question to the board even though I am replying to your post.
As I have said before, a lot gets stated here as fact, that just isnt true, but to prove it takes time after the fact, when the company releases something that contradicts the statement made, as is the case here with JPs June post.
Personalizit......think about it. If the kinks have been worked out and the program works flawlessly, why was a pilot test program launched last week.....LOL
Also ask him if he wishes to divulge where he got the info to make the statement that many big fortune 100 and 500 members have already licensed Qode and have made payments? I have seen nothing public to indicate that statement is true. If he means some companies have done small campaigns with NEOMs subs then I understand. But that does not mean they have licensed and paid for Qode. And to state its a huge list at that. We know of a couple that have licensed it like Virgin, but thats not a huge list.
Hangdog.I never said I couldnt figure it out, and your insult was unwarranted. What I did say is its a far ways from the simple point and click technology that PC was billed as, when you have to navigate to 4 sites. As for the camera function come on now. They have had 3 years now to get that operating, and to date the only 2 camera phones that support it are the 3 year old models they announced in 2003. Wonder why with so many new models released in the last 3 years none of them support PC or now Qode?
At least my glass half empty attitude, hasnt had me buying this stock from .40 on down, like your glass half full attitude has caused you and many others to do. I can now buy at the real bottom, when it comes, unlike many of you that chased it with the glass half full perspective.
As for your other post about bringing in the coupon, where do you bring it? How many franchises have been sold to date? I see only 2 locations still listed on the autoxperience web site so unless you are in southern florida, or canada, the coupon isnt worth the paper the ad was printed on.
Yellowjacket you are wrong. There was nothing in the PR stating that they were just changing the trademark name as a DBA name. Matter of fact the article states they were in fact changing the NMPR name. See where it says previously called? And where in the PR does it say NMPR name will remain doing business as AutoXperience? It dont say it anywhere.
""""""Previously called NeoMedia Micro Paint Repair, AutoXperience is an international developer, supplier and trainer to automotive aftermarket service providers, """""
By the way, why since NEOM announced the rebranding of the paint business, are they still filing SEC documents and using the old name? This new S-3 still refers to the paint business as NMPR.
you are right Retired.he and others have been playing with and practicing this for some time now, so yes its easier for them. But still even by his own method, you have to go through several web sites to finally get to the coupon, and thats a long ways from direct connect that qode is supposed to offer.
Based on what. Cornell has always sold their shares immediately into the open market, and I bet the mobot employee that brought suit, will want to unload his shares into the open market, as will a few more of the new stock holders that this S-3 covers.
Matter of fact if you read the old filings, you will find that Cornell held zero shares of NEOM in one of those filings, that was posted on this message board a few months ago. So to suggest that if they convert new warrants, they will hold onto the shares is ludicrous.
exactly Yellowjacket, contrary to what some others are stating here, as best we know, at this time they have zero ownership.
They didnt sell shares for their financing fees, they sold shares for profit. Their financing fees have all along been paid for by NEOM in one way or another, or did you forget they paid Cornell millions for all these financing deals.
Cornell dont hold shares if there is a profit to be made period, and it has nothing to do with recovering their fees.
What evidence do you have they own shares which have not been sold? They have warrants that have not yet been converted, they have preferred series c shares that have not been converted, but what evidence do you have that they still hold any of the shares THAT HAVE BEEN CONVERTED?
yes and its been withdrawn already. It states in the withdrawel, due to a mistake by management the filing was on the wrong form.Geesh when will they get it right?
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=4647315&Type=HTML
cabbie the mistake is I should of used the word doesn't instead of dont, but when you are typing you doesnt take the time to profread..LOL
I thought many here expressed their highest confidence in managements ability to get the job done and successfully launch their product. And with all the problems they are facing with consolidating and reigning in the acquisitions, the launch of the product, the need for finding some financing etc. and its recommended that posters email them with ideas on how to run a successful campaign......LOL, that is really funny.
LOL Duke....I used to be an expert at spelling, and was responsible for writing a ton of operating procedure manuals as well as publishing weekly training schedules. My spelling went to heck once I was exposed to the internet with all the new abreviations, and posts in half english etc. At that point correctness became less important to me, since mistakes are so wide spread on the web. Also my two finger pecking dont help matters much..LOL
I for one dont think anyone will lose their life savings, if thats any consellation. I do however believe it will take much longer that was projected here, for NEOM to come to fruition. And the pps right now is about at fair value for the company, regardless of what others here have said in the past.
Any time a stock is run up past fair value, based on hype and pumping, it will eventually return back to its fair market value. Thats what happened to NEOM and all the consppiracy theories about manipulation by mms etc is hogwash. Yes there may be some of that, as there was also a lot of pumping goiing on, but thats not why the stock is at .12 today. its there because thats fair value at this time, based on the companies performance.
a recap in ones own words is not a copyright violation, but on this board we see what happens when posters use their own words. Even when they use TS words they are attacked buy some, and phrases like "he would never use words like that" are thrown around.
Clawman there is your scavenger hunt idea being used in california. And they say they come up with the idea because they listened to the carriers etc. I wonder just who NEOM listened to when they come up with a 10 percent coupon from the other side of their business.
"""""""We developed a platform approach to complement our winning LOC-AID Treasure application after listening to both carriers' and Fortune 500 companies' desire for mobile marketing campaigns" states LOC-AID CEO Isaias Sudit. """"""""