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.
Good news indeed! Money talks.
Mike
Stock Exchange Listing Requirements
1. American Stock Exchange (AMEX)
My note: from what know, there's an several alternatives (not well known trics) whereas companies with a certain capitalization level can qualify for AMEX listing at any bid price (rather than the standard $3 initial bid). This is what I suspect Jay is looking at. From what I'm hearing MOBL satisfies (or it will in the near future) all the required qualification cryteria of this alternative AMEX listing. Although it differs from what I knew (as an alternative to AMEX listing w/o the $3/share requirement), the Standard III below I see also allows AMEX listing w/o minimum PPS requirement.
http://www.venturelawcorp.com/listing_requirements_amex.html
Regular Financial Guidelines : The American Stock Exchange requires pre-tax income of $750,000 for most recent fiscal year or two out of the most three recent fiscal years, a market value of public float of $3 million, an initial minimum bid price of $3 and stockholder's equity of $4 million.
Alternate Financial Guidelines : A company has a market value of public float of $15 million, an initial minimum bid price of $3 and stockholder's equity of $4 million. The company must have a three-year operating history.
2. NASDAQ National Market
The NASDAQ National Market imposes minimum bid price, quantitative and other criteria in determining whether a company will be permitted to list its stock on the NASDAQ.
Initial Minimum Bid Price for Stock : The stock must have a minimum initial bid price of $5.00, and must later remain at or above $1.00.
Quantitative Requirements : A company must have net tangible assets of $6 million and net income in the latest fiscal year or two of the past three fiscal years of $1 million. In addition, these companies must have a public float of $1.1 million, a market value of the public float of $8 million, a minimum of 400 shareholders, and at least three market makers.
Capitalization Alternative : Companies that do not meet the quantitative requirements may nevertheless be listed on NASDAQ if they have a market capitalization of $75 million or total assets of $75 million and total revenues of $75 million, an initial minimum bid price of $5.00.
Peer Review Requirement : The practices of all independent auditors for companies listed on the NASDAQ are subject to monitoring under a peer review system. Also, the quality control systems of accounting firms of NASDAQ-listed companies are reviewed by peers every three years.
3. NASDAQ SmallCap
Small capitalization companies can be listed on the NASDAQ SmallCap Market if they have:
net tangible assets of $4 million, or
$50 million market capitalization, or
net income in the latest fiscal year or two of the past three fiscal years of $750,000.
In addition, these companies must have a public float of $1 million, a market value of the public float of $5 million, a minimum of 300 shareholders, and at least three market makers. Also, these companies must have an operating history of at least one year or $50 million market capitalization. The initial minimum bid price is $4.00 and the same ongoing minimum bid price and peer review requirements as are set forth above apply.
4. New York Stock Exchange
The New York Stock Exchange imposes minimum quantitative standards relating to distribution and size criteria and financial criteria.
Distribution and Size Criteria : To be traded on the NYSExchange, a company must meet certain requirements as to the number of shareholders, must have a market value of public shares of $100 million or an IPO market value of $60 million.
Financial Criteria : The company must have pretax earnings of $4.5 million in the most recent year or $6.5 over the past three years, operating cash flow of $25 million aggregate over the past three years or revenues of $250 million for the most recent year. Other factors are considered as well, and the NYSE has broad discretion regarding the listing of a company.
5. Boston Stock Exchange
Distribution and Size Criteria : 750,000 shares in public float, $1,500,000 market value of float, and a minimum bid of $2. In addition there is a merit review.
Financial Criteria : Total assets of $3,000,000, tangible assets of $2,000,000, intangible assets of $2,000,000 as defined by BSE, $100,000 net income in 2 of the past 3 years or 2 million in net tangible assets, and shareholder equity of $1,000,000.
6. Chicago Stock Exchange
Distribution and Size Criteria : 500,000 shares in the public float held by 800 shareholders or 1,000,000 shares held by 400 shareholders, a minimum bid of $5 per share, and $3,000,000 in market value of public float.
Financial Criteria : Net tangible assets of $4,000,000, $750,000 pre-tax and $400,000 net income in 2 of the most recent 3 years
Alternate
Distribution and Size Criteria : 1,000,000 shares in the public float held by 400 shareholders and a minimum bid of $3 per share, and $3,000,000 in market value of public float.
Financial Criteria : Net tangible assets of $12,000,000 with 3 years of operations
Tier II
Distribution and Size Criteria : 250,000 shares in the public float held by 500 shareholders.
Financial Criteria : Net tangible assets of $2,000,000 with 3 years of operations, and demonstrated ability to produce adequate net earnings.
7. Pacific Stock Exchange
Distribution and Size Criteria : 500,000 shares in the public float held by 800 shareholders with a market value of $3,000,000 and a minimum bid price of $5.00 or 1,000,000 shares in the float with a market value of $15,000,000 held by 400 shareholders and a minimum bid of $3.00.
Financial Criteria : Net worth of $4,000,000, $750,000 in pre-tax income, and $400,000 net income, or $12,000,000 in net worth and 3 years of operating history.
Tier II
Distribution and Size Criteria : 500,000 shares in the public float held by 500 shareholders with a market value of $1,500,000 and a minimum bid price of $3 per share or 1,000,000 shares in the public float held by 500 shareholders and a minimum bid price of $1 per share.
Financial Criteria : Net tangible assets of $2,000,000, net income of $100,000 and 3 years of operating history or a net worth of $8,000,000.
8. Philadelphia Stock Exchange
Net Tangible Assets : Total Assets (including the value of patents, copyrights and trademarks but exclude the value of goodwill) less total liabilities of at least $4,000,000. Pre-tax income of $750,000 and net income of at least $400,000 in its last fiscal year.
Public Distribution : At least 500,000 publicly held shares and at least 800 public shareholders if the issuer has between 500,000 and 1 million shares publicly held, or at least 400 public shareholders if the issuer has either (i) over 1 million shares publicly held or (ii) over 500,000 shares publicly held and average daily trading volume in excess of 2,000 shares per day for a six month period.
Stock Price/Market Value : $5 per share on each of the five business days prior to the application date and $3,000,000 aggregate market value.
Alternative
Net Tangible Assets : Total Assets less total liabilities must be $12 million;
Public Distribution : 1,000,000 shares publicly held with at least 800 public shareholders if the issuer has between 500,000 and 1 million shares publicly held, or at least 400 public shareholders if the issuer has either (i) over 1 million shares publicly held or (ii) over 500,000 shares publicly held and average daily trading volume in excess of 2,000 shares per day for a six month period.
Stock Price/Market Value : Stock price of $3 per share on each of the five business days prior to the application date and aggregate Market Value of $15,000,000
9. OTC Bulletin Board (administered by NASDAQ)
Financial Requirements : No minimum shareholder equity or income. Companies must be reporting companies, providing an annual report to shareholders, current in all its filings, and subject to SEC proxy rules.
Distribution and Size Criteria : No minimum number of shareholders or shares outstanding, other than having a sufficient number of shareholders and shares outstanding to allow a trading market.
SEC status : Listed companies must have completed a registration of the company or its securities and have reporting company status. Companies must be current in all their filings. New shell companies will not be granted a trading symbol.
Companies with securities quoted on the OTCBB are subject to periodic reporting of financial information to the SEC. Issuers who file with the SEC via EDGAR are not required to submit hard copy filings with the OTCBB or the NASDAQ. Unlike all other exchanges, stocks trading on the OTC Bulletin Board cannot be shorted.
Opinion from Market Watch:
http://aolpf5.marketwatch.com/discussions/msgReader.asp?siteId=aolpf&parentId=2&forumId=17&a...
To visit most of the other MB's (all in one place):
http://www.boardcentral.com/aios/aios.cgi
Mike
***The Article mentioned in today's PR:
http://www.pe.com/business/local/stories/PE_Biz_modular02.a10c3.html
Global buys Aurora assets
07:58 PM PST on Tuesday, March 1, 2005
By JONATHAN SHIKES / The Press-Enterprise
Changes within California's portable-classroom industry continued Tuesday as a Chowchilla firm closed a deal to buy many of the assets of Moreno Valley-based Aurora Modular Industries, which folded last August and filed for bankruptcy.
Global Diversified Industries, one of several medium-size modular-building manufacturers in the state, also bought the rights to Aurora's well-known name and blueprints, said Global Diversified's/ chief executive Phil Hamilton in a recent interview.
"They were the Cadillac of the industry," Hamilton said by phone. "We plan to switch to their brand. Our current product is good, but this gives us a higher line."
Global Diversified, which operates a 100,000-square-foot factory in Chowchilla, a city on Highway 99 northwest of Fresno, will triple its production with the acquisition and could also double or even triple its yearly revenues, which were about $12 million in 2004, Hamilton added.
Aurora had been one of the state's largest manufacturers of prefabricated classrooms until it unexpectedly closed its doors and laid off all of its workers, leaving behind millions of dollars in unpaid debts and numerous unfinished products.
In October, a U.S. Bankruptcy Court trustee raised $1.6 million by auctioning Aurora's assets, said attorney Frank Adams. Global Diversified was the largest buyer, taking home raw materials, equipment, tools and unfinished buildings.
In late January, a second portable-classroom maker, Temecula-based Turnkey Inc., locked its doors and filed paperwork in U.S. District Court to dissolve itself.
The company's creditors may eventually force Turnkey into bankruptcy as well.
Both Aurora and Turnkey built classrooms, cafeterias, gyms, restrooms and other buildings for school districts throughout California.
Their collapse has left behind angry subcontractors and cautious school districts, but it has also created business opportunities for other manufacturers, said Steve Cary, assistant superintendent for business services at Upland Unified School District.
The state's largest portable-classroom builder, Perris-based Modtech Holdings, "has been able to grow quite a bit in picking up Aurora business," Cary said by phone.
Both Modtech and Global Diversified bid on Aurora's incomplete work at Upland Unified, with Modtech getting the job.
The major industry issues have been the costs of raw materials like concrete and lumber, which jumped dramatically in 2004, as well as increasing labor costs.
"What I'm hearing from my peers is that this industry may be dying because of all these costs," Cary said.
"It will be interesting to see what happens."
Reach Jonathan Shikes at (951) 368-9552 or jshikes@pe.com
1. It's all in the numbers:
Check out the financials over the last 4 Q's:
Total Revenue 2,221 2,106 646 548
Cost of Revenue 1,508 1,449 514 378
Gross Profit 713 657 133 170
Net Income $28 $83 ($317) ($173)
If the trend continues (over $2MM for the last Q), and the net income continues to grow, watch out. We are already on the positive. Small, but positive.
2. What today's move did:
(a) it turned around the graphs (yesterday we had 100% sell all over):
http://quotes.barchart.com/texadv.asp?sym=gdvi
(b) it moved up the indicators (support, pilot, and resistance levels):
Now: the support level is at 0.055, the pivot point at 0.06, and the first resistance level at 0.07. Second, and third resistance levels are at 0.075, and 0.085 respectively. Learn to calculate them yourselves, as these are the main indicators that the MM's use:
http://www.e-minidaytrader.com/snr.html
Mike
Thanks Chip for your down to Earth note.
Finally, the expected Aurora related PR came, but the price did not respond. At least the Volume did. What I liked about it was the fact that Phil is not pumping it at all. However, the PR could be a bit more detailed. Overall, not too bad!
After the PR, I expected some marginal move. For a company with: (i) good growth potential, (ii) in a low-risk sector, (iii) relatively small OS, and (iv) good (and increasing) revenue, at this point IMO the PPS should be much higher. W/o any intention to pump it, I believe GDVI is going to move much higher soon after the Q release. I won't be surprised it to start moving a bit higher even this week.
It looks like some people were shaken out today. This is a healthy necessity in order to move higher. Today the stock showed nice (and not unexpected) resilience with smart money buyers jumping on the Ask several times at .05.
With fewer weak hands, if the volume holds, the chance for a breakout north later this week seems very real to me. In any event, the Q as I understand it is only about 2 weeks away, and if the revenue is say north of 2MM, this should move upward quite nicely.
My calculation is very simple, and it's based on well known OTC:BB valuation rules. For growth companies, that aren't yet EPS positive (but the finances are getting closer to breakdown), the usual formula is:
PPS = [Revenue x (VF)]/OS, where VF is a valuation factor
PS: The VF for growth stocks is usually above 2; I saw over 50 for stocks (with EPS well into the negative territory) that are perceived to have high growth rates sometimes in the near future. For instance: GTEL (with over 1.06 Billion OS; this was the last call-in figure I knew, at the end of January), about the same revenue, a lot more debt, and no immediate chance to improve the finances, it's trading right now around $0.3/share. This means that the valuation factor (which at this point it’s at a high premium, based on the perceived future value) is: (0.3/0.05) x (1060/300), or more than 21 times as high as here (over 42 in absolute value, after reaching as high as 50 last week). {It was trading slightly above 0.06 2 months ago. Since then some perceived good news (true or not), and not improved finances moved the VF from around 8 to over 42 now.}
From what I remember (out of memory, I might be off) you said that the revenue for the last 6 months (or was it 9 months?) was about 6 MM? Assuming a revenue of only 8MM/year, and 300MM OS, and a VF of "2" (which is about the base for a growth stock), the PPS should be at least 0.0533, or about where we are today. From what I could gather about the growth potential here (and comparing it with that of other good growth potential stocks), the VF should not be below 2 (as it is now), but at least 4. Hence, right now, the EPS should be at least 0.1, IMO. If (as I hear) a revenue of 20MM/year can be achieved, then the PPS should move to over 0.13/share at today's low VF, or to at least 0.26 if the VF increases to above 4 (as it should, IMO). If additionally the Q shows either a more than say 2 MM revenue, and/or a good move toward a positive EPS (compared to the last Q's), then the VF should jump much higher.
PS: I don't trust pumping/bashing a certain stock on this or any other board has more than a marginal influence (contrary to what many believe) on the price. The PPS is decided by the organized "tribes," that include, but are not restricted to the MM's. Hence, this is not a "pump," but an attempt to explain what I perceive to be a much too low PPS at this point. And, of course, my rational above it’s open for discussion.
PPS: Chip, if you don’t mind, can you repost this over RB, please. For some reason I only can read, but not post there. May it be because I don’t have a Lycos E-mail address? Just curious to see the reaction of some of “our friends” over there.
Mike
Welcome Chip, and thanks for your trip report. Do you know if Aurora it's a closed deal? If so, why in the world Phil didn't put already a PR on it? Has Global started using some of the Aurora manufacuring facility, or just the supplies, and designs?
TIA,
Mike
Alan and Greg,
I enjoy your polite way of puting it. Not sure I can agree with you as the 22nm goes, and the future of scaled down IC's, but sure enough I agree IO's development will take time (10 years sounds reasonable to me). My point however (and that's JMO) is that it won't take as long as some people think (the ones that think that only our grandchildren will have it).
As for you, Greg, I guess it's good I don't know the meaning of "stalking horse." From the tone of your note it doesn't sound as something nice. All I can say is that I was not as lucky as you are to learn only one language (English, that is) from the very beginning. Humans are not computers and should not learn all those silly other languages (some of which I started to forget anyway). But, that's life....
"you are serving as a stalking horse."
Got 2 go,
Mike
1. What modern processors are manufactured on gate arrays with aluminum interconnects?
I was reading about it in a recent SI. But that's not very important. Let me refrase the main point I wanted to make. After IMB clearly demonstrated the goodness of Cu wires as compared to Al wires, nobody wanted to jump into it. In fact, if you recall, initially Intel sais that's nonsense. However as soon as AMD demonstrated that Cu is the way to go, most of the others got into it soon thereafter. So my main point was that, after Intel's recent demonstration, mostly everyone will jump at it, and invest in Si photonics. This will speed up the development. Do you agree?
2. Where are you getting this? Silicon feature sizes are already below 70nm on today's 90nm processes and Intel has working processors on a still smaller 65nm process.
You are right! 65 nm is already here, but (from a practical point of view) it's hard to believe it will go any lower. Deep UV lithography can't be pushed to much more (even if bottom layer antireflection coatings are used), and the electron lithography (and other fancy solutions) as I know is still not usable.
3. I remember listening to Gordon Moore about 10 years ago saying that Intel had a way to get to .25u and his process experts said they thought they could see a way to do 180nm but beyond that it was anybody's guess. Solutions were found and Intel is now confident they can scale silicon for another 10 years, at least.
I've alway been a Moore fun. But his law got "bent" in 2001 as you know. And Moore's curve it's about to get flat, IMO. Not too much more room for growth, IMO.
4. I agree with you that someday photons will replace electrons but that day is still a ways off.
Not when everyone jumps in, IMO. The stakes are too high, and whoomever doesn't invest in it (IO's) will be left behind. The ones that accumulate most of IP's in this area have the biggest chance to conquer a good slize of the future market. Since I'm impressed with Intel's results (after only some 2 years), most probably (or at least is what I hope) they will keep the lead. But, once they "oppened their mouth," they better move fast.
PS: Life was not as good to me as it was with most of you. English was the 5-th language I have to learn. So, when I write fast, I still have problems getting my point out (I never took any English classes). Due to my relatively poor ability to write coherent phrases, and the tendency to form long ones it's something I can't hide.
Mike
Chip, just get it over with. Current CMOS fabrication techniques will not be viable in upcoming generations of processors. You know very well some current CPUs are still primarily manufactured using aluminum metal layers within the CMOS gate array. These aluminum layers have proven to be ineffective above 1.1GHz. Do you recall Intel's recall of all Pentium III 1.13GHz chips? If this is is not an indicating factor to you, than just forget it.
Then, the Pentium III core yield rate above 933MHz has been rather poor. Do you agree? The effects are not limited to Intel. AMD's higher-clocked Athlon Thunderbirds are now being manufactured using a copper interconnect process. Copper is a better solution with less resistance and better conductivity than aluminum. But the switch to Cu interconnect, higher k for the gate oxide, and lower k dielectrics between the interconnects will only solve the problem for a little while longer.
Nowadays, most manufacturers agree that CMOS technology will not be able to scale efficiently (some still say below 0.1 micron, but I'll give you the the 0.07 micron critical feature size limitation. You know very well current CPUs, such as the Pentium III, are still manufactured with a .18-micron process. hy do you think the switch to below 0.1 micron didn't take place (as the 2000 roadmap called for)? The need for smaller die sizes is clearly evident as core clock speeds increase. CMOS technology could be outdated quickly with the theoretical practical limit of say .07 micron. A new process will be needed to replace this aging standard. Why do you think everybody, including Intel is considering other options, including the introduction of the Silicon-on-Insulator (SOI) fabrication process? All these alternative processes, however, are only intermediate to the real solution.
You like it or not, integrated optics will be the final, long overdue answer. In case you didn't know, historically, integrated optics (for obvious reasons) were the first choice anyway, and not integrated electronics. The rapid advacement of IC's kept them down for a while, but their (IO's) time has come. After Intel's announcement you'll see all the other chip companies, one by one, reconsider their view of Si as it come to its use to IO's. And you'll see quite a fierce competition among them, that will accelerate the development.
I'm not trying to sound like a "prophet" (as you like to call me). Just trying to asess the best options.
Mike
------------------------------
Exactly. Having gone from designing in 6 um NMOS
to 90 nm CMOS over the first quarter century of my
adult life I have very little tolerance for tech prophets
claiming the "end is near" for mainstream semi tech-
nology. I have heard it a hundred times before starting
around 1.5 um.
Chip, do you believe:
1. 2 to 3 atomic layers gate oxide
2. below 50 angstroms diffused layers
3. below 50 nm feature size
are practical?
If the answer is no for any of the above, you got youself the answer. Further downsizing CMOS will not be possible for too long. What's your good alternative?
W/o being trying to follow in your footsteps (being rude), if it were for people like you, we'll still use horses to move around, while some of us are dreaming at flying cars.
Mike
---------------------
Exactly. Having gone from designing in 6 um NMOS
to 90 nm CMOS over the first quarter century of my
adult life I have very little tolerance for tech prophets
claiming the "end is near" for mainstream semi tech-
nology. I have heard it a hundred times before starting
around 1.5 um.
Greg, "near-term" in any technological development to me can mean say anywhere from 5 to 20 years, depending on so many factors. It took electronics near 30 years (from the Se phase to the beginning of IC's. So it won't happen tomorrow, that's for sure. My enthusiasm is based on the fact that for the first time it sounds very plausible Si and of course derivatives of Si (e.g., SiO2) appear feasible to make all the needed components. All up to no long ago the all integrated optics designs involved Si, III-V's, and a host of other materials. Integrating all the components made of so many materials would have been indeed difficult. Not anymore! Would it take time. As always, sure it will. Noone can predict how long it will take. However Si-only will accelerate it a great deal.
Mike
Chipguy, how does over 120 scientific papers, 25 patents (mostly in semi device areas), and close to 30 years teaching (over 20 electrical engineering courses, mostly graduate level)sounds to you? Do you really believe I need to read "Popular Mechanics" to get my info?
EOC (end of conversation).
Mike
Chipguy, would you read this:
http://www.forbes.com/technology/enterprisetech/2005/02/16/cz_ec_0216intc.html
rather than giving me that "whatever" answer. For now, the trend is toward hybrid chips, and if all-Si can be used for all components, all-optical chips will follow in some not very distant future.
If you are happy with the speed microelectronics only chips can deliver, I'm not. I want to access a good Mullin Rouge show, or the Vienna philharmonic or whatever else on-line whenever I feel like. And I wish I live to do it (I'm growing a bit old, you know, so I don't have too much time to wait ...)
Mike
Saturn,
The next phase in the chip development will most certainly be the Optoelectronics phase (what I call a hybrid chip). All electronics chips can’t deliver speed. So the all-microelectronics based chips will be history soon. Next phase will be photonics integrated chips (what I call all optical chips).
You are right. For now Intel is getting into the hybrid chip:
Giving the fact that Intel is a recent entrant into the photonics field, the first step toward a hybrid chip is very significant.
From one of last PR:
“Initially, they discovered increasing the light pump power beyond a certain point no longer increased amplification and eventually even decreased it. The reason was a physical process called "two-photon absorption," which occurs when two photons from the pump beam hit an atom at the same time and knock an electron away. These excess electrons build up over time and collect in the waveguide until they absorb so much light that amplification stops.
"Intel's breakthrough solution was to integrate a semiconductor structure, technically called a PIN (P-type - Intrinsic - N-type) device into the waveguide. When a voltage is applied to the PIN, it acts like a vacuum and removes most of the excess electrons from the light's path. The PIN device combined with the Raman effect produces a continuous laser beam."
"Fundamentally, we have demonstrated for the first time that standard silicon can be used to build devices that amplify light," said Dr. Mario Paniccia, director, Intel's Photonics Technology Lab. "The use of high-quality photonic devices has been limited because they are expensive to manufacture, assemble and package. This research is a major step toward bringing the benefits of low-cost, high-bandwidth silicon based optical devices to the mass market."
Even more significant to me is the fact that contrary to all we knew thus far about high speed Optoelectronics (that were supposed to be based on III-V compound semiconductors), the last announcement from Intel demonstrates that Silicon can be used; at least for two of the critical optical components. Of course, you’ll still need to develop and integrate all the other optical components, i.e. arrayed-waveguide gratings, with aplication to channel multiplexers, demultiplexers, optical switches, dispersion compensators, plus the passive components such as lenses, and prisms. So yes, you are right in the near future the chips will use hybrid optoelectronic circuits.
To me Intel announcement is very important not only because Si is still the “king,” (sad for me to recognize it– as a former developer and strong believer of/in III-V devices for the last 20+ years), but because the integration of optics and microelectronics using all-Si components will happen much faster. Just for instance think that the attenuation of channel wave-guide fabricated using Si is expected to be quasi identical with equivalent glass fibers. Similar channel waveguide fabricated using polymers can be expected to have at least an order of magnitude higher attenuation. So yes, it looks like all Si is the way to go.
Next logical phase will be all optical chips. If this can be made on Si, the development of these chips will not take as long as previously thought. As you know, previous designs were involving all those fancy stuff such as nonlinear optics, and were supposed to be made from various materials that are hard to manufacture and integrate.
Not only fast speed computers, but a whole range of other applications will push the development of all optical chips. Think about all the clear advantages that integrated optics have as compared to the traditional electronics. Using light as the carrier of information, which is unaffected to electromagnetic perturbations, cause this field to be one of the most viable solutions concerning the telecommunications bottleneck. In addition, the application of integrated optics in the sensor field offers a better response as compared to the transducers used nowadays: Its capability to resist harsh environments, the measurement without direct contact and the safety in explosive media cause this to be of huge interest for the industry, etc, etc.
Mike
Saturn, thanks for your good input. However:
"In the study, published in Thursday's journal Nature, the Intel researchers reported encoding 1 billion bits of data per second, 50 times faster than previous silicon experiments. They also said they could achieve rates of up to 10 billion bits per second within months."
"This is a significant step toward building optical devices that move data around inside a computer at the speed of light," said Pat Gelsinger, Intel's chief technology officer.
http://www.iapplianceweb.com/story/OEG20040212S0036.htm
Don't you agree that Intel's CTO implys the move is toward an all-optical chip? At least is how I read it. Only all optical components can move data inside the box (computer in this case) at the "speed of light." A hybrid chip simply can't do it.
You are very right in saying this will take time. But, it won't be as long as most might expect. Faster speed internet needs (and many other high speed applications) will put pressure on the computer makers to drastically increase the speed. And hybrid chips will simply not be able to deliver. As I see it, Intel's announcement is a very first good step in the all-optical chip direction.
To make an unrelated paralel: Does anyone still think hybrid cars will be the answer? Certainly not! Ultimatelly, the hydrogen cars will winn. And it will also happen, IMO, much faster than many people had expecteed.
Mike
---------------------------------
The all optical chip is a wet dream probably a decade or two away. We do not even have a decent discrete all optical switch , and we are miles away from all optical computing. Today you use fiber optics and photons for transmission, convert to electrons for amplification, switching and processing, and then the electronic signal is converted back to photons via a laser for further transmission or distribution. All this requires several components.
The Intel announcement implies that in 4 -5 years you will be able to integrate a laser and its control, switching and processing electrical functions on the same chip. This in itself will be a major step in improving the cost/ performance of optical communications. The integration on a single chip should greatly speed up the "slow electronics", and it will also be cheaper.
So Intel Inside will live on for another decade or so.
Maybe forever !!!
Will "Intel Inside" still be there after the electronic chips get replaced by the all-optical chips? Any comments?
Short-term all microelectronic chip companies are going to struggle a bit. As the feature size goes down and down in a quest for higher and higher speed, so it does the net income. Most money is spent on buying more and more sophisticated tools.
Long term, this should change as Intel (from yesterday's announcement and other information available in tech journals) is positioning itself as a front runner in the development of the new all-optical chips. If Intel continues to develop the integrated optics chips, "Intel Inside" will still be inside most of computers (and used for so many other high speed telecom applications).
I was very surprised to see that yesterday series of announcements have not "excited" anyone. Non tech people (and the financial gurus for that matter) apparently have no idea about integrated optics, much less about all-optical computers, and why they are so badly needed.
Forget for now about the whole range of other applications. Lets only talk about higher (and I mean much higher) speed chips. People are screaming for much faster, lower power computers.
They ("we the People") will want to access any cultural or sporting events on-line, much the same we do it with word data right now. Say you wish to see (whenever you want) a show from Moulin Rouge in Paris, or the super bawl, or whatever. You'll need much higher speed than electronics will ever be able to provide (even if III-V semiconductors such as GaAs or InP are used instead of Si).
The RC of the electronic microchips (due to the combined resistance of all those wires connecting those near 1 Billion components, and the relatively high-q dielectrics that separate those components), introduce delays and the only way to increase the speed is to reduce the combined length of the wires, and further reduce C. This means the critical dimensions of the components have still to go down a lot, and the number of components has to be further increased (up to 10 Billion proposed on that small area chip), on an even smaller chip area.
The all-optical chip development will not happen overnight, but I can assure you it will happen much sooner than many people realize (including some experts in the semi business). And yesterday announcements based on that article in Nature is a very important step in that direction. It looks like “Intel Inside” will be there for many decades (the way the electronic chip already did) after the electronics chip gets extinct.
Mike
Opinion - for what is worth!
http://beaconequityresearch.com/commentary.php
Sorry folks, if this matters, my opinion is very similar to this guy's. Just thought you wanted to know about it.
I'm also just an observer of GTEL, and not intending to get in.
Mike
Squacker, Chip took some pictures during his visit. Can yu help him? Although I believe some pictures of the factory will be available in the new web site, that's one month away. It will be nice to see what Chip got.
Here's his Msg:
By: chipwa10
16 Feb 2005, 10:24 PM EST
Msg. 7479 of 7481
Can someone post their e:mail address and I'll send the six pictures to them and they can post them to the message board. I'm not having much luck doing it myself. I have six pictures; Two of the factory and four of the finished classroom inventory on the site. Thanks. Chipwa1
(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Hold; LT Rating- Hold)
I'm glad the Commpany did release the 3-rd PR shortly after I posted that Msg. Non tech people (and the financial gurus for that matter) have no idea about integrated optics, much less about all-optical computers, and why they are vadly needed. People are screeming for much faster, lower power computers.
They (we the People) will want (and we will) to access any cultural or sporting events on-line, much the same we do it with word data right now. Say you wish to see (wenever you want) a show from Moulain Rouge in Paris, or the superbawl, or whatever. You'll need much higher speed than electronics will ever be able to provide (even if III-V semiconductors such as GaAs, or InP are used instead of Si).
The RC of the electronic microchips (due to the combined resistance of all those wires connecting those near 1 Billion components, and the relativelly high-q dielectrics that separate those components), introduce delays and the only way to increase the spead is to reduce the combined length of the wires, and further reduce C. This means the critical dimensions of the components have still to go down a lot, and the number of components has to be further increased (up to 10 Billion proposed on that small area chip), on an even smaller chip area.
I agree that the all-optical chip development will not happen overnight, but I can assure you it will happen much soooner than people realize. And today's announcement (in Nature) is an important step in that direction.
Mike
This news should move CYBT again, just like last time. I predict a 5 to 10 MOMO from this point. It can even go above 0.01 by next week, IMO. If you were here during the last run, you know what to do: luck your shares up for now. You'll be glad you did it, IMO
Good DD site:
http://www.ddmachine.com/default.asp?s=cybt.ob
Mike
Hey Pirate, how do you like this? It's going to happen much sooner than many people may realize, IMO.
For now, the good news is that for about one week (for some reason) people started to notice BTOO. As you see, BTOO is on the most popular searches stock list on Board Central:
http://www.boardcentral.com/index.php?view=Top%2FAios
Mike
Intel unveils laser breakthrough
(Source: BBC News)
The chip is the first to produce continuous laser light
Intel has unveiled research that could mean data is soon being moved around chips at the speed of light. Scientists at Intel have overcome a fundamental problem that before now has prevented silicon being used to generate and amplify laser light.
The breakthrough should make it easier to interconnect data networks with the chips that process the information.
The Intel researchers said products exploiting the breakthrough should appear by the end of the decade.
Cheap as chips
"We've overcome a fundamental limit," said Dr Mario Paniccia, director of Intel's photonics technology lab.
Writing in the journal Nature, Dr Paniccia - and colleagues Haisheng Rong, Richard Jones, Ansheng Liu, Oded Cohen, Dani Hak and Alexander Fang - show how they have made a continuous laser from the same material used to make computer processors.
Currently, says Dr Paniccia, telecommunications equipment that amplifies the laser light that travels down fibre optic cables is very expensive because of the exotic materials, such as gallium arsenide, used to make it.
Chip making tricks could make optical processing much cheaper
Telecommunications firms and chip makers would prefer to use silicon for these light-moving elements because it is cheap and many of the problems of using it in high-volume manufacturing have been solved.
"We're trying to take our silicon competency in manufacturing and apply it to new areas," said Dr Paniccia.
While work has been done to make some of the components that can move light around, before now silicon has not successfully been used to generate or amplify the laser light pulses used to send data over long distances.
This is despite the fact that silicon is a much better amplifier of light pulses than the form of the material used in fibre optic cables.
This improved amplification is due to the crystalline structure of the silicon used to make computer chips.
Dr Paniccia said that the structure of silicon meant that when laser light passed through it, some colliding photons rip electrons off the atoms within the material.
"It creates a cloud of electrons sitting in the silicon and that absorbs all the light," he said.
But the Intel researchers have found a way to suck away these errant electrons and turn silicon into a material that can both generate and amplify laser light.
Even better, the laser light produced in this way can, with the help of easy-to-make filters, be tuned across a very wide range of frequencies.
Semi-conductor lasers made before now have only produced light in a narrow frequency ranges.
The result could be the close integration of the fibre optic cables that carry data as light with the computer chips that process it.
Dr Paniccia said the work was the one of several steps needed if silicon was to be used to make components that could carry and process light in the form of data pulses.
"It's a technical validation that it can work," he said.
----------------
My note: Integrated optics chips will replace the microelectronic chips (the electron carriers will be replaced by photon carriers, and the copper wires will be replaced by waveguides) in a not very distant future, IMO. More's law that has worked for some 30 years is harder and harder to implement. At below 0.07 micron feature size (that along with low-k dielectrics that are needed, that are needed to further increase the chip speed), are making the capital investment and technology prohibitive. Congratulations to Intel. It looks like they are again the first in making the first step, break their own law (Moore's law), and increase the chip speed by several orders of magnitude.
Mike
***Old Web Site:
According to "Chip" the new one will be available in about one month (see previous Msg).
http://pennystocktalk.com/gdvi.htm
By using the additional Aurora facilities, Global will soon be a major player in the modular building business, IMO. Good short-term and especially long-term investment, IMO.
Mike
Hey Squacker! Wake up! Good News I think!
Here's a post from RB. If Chip is right, it means that not only the Aurora deal went through, but the Company is already using some of its stuff.
I wonder why Phil has not released any news. As usual he doesn't pay too much attention to such details.
--------------------------------
By: chipwa10
15 Feb 2005, 06:37 PM EST
Msg. 7471 of 7475
This will be as neutral as I can be from the trip!
HIGHLIGHTS!
Spent the first hour with Phil where he reviewed the history from Majestic, Global and Aurora. Also gave us his background. Phil was very open and down to earth; give both the positives and the negatives.
My estimate of Finished Goods Inventory; 25 Classrooms stage for shipment on about four acres. In Process work on the shop floor; 2 standard Global units and 2 Aurora units (much bigger than what global units are}. They set up a job shop line to handle that build at this time. They have 5 production lines.
There is a lot of raw inventory, a good part of it from Aurora; steel, wood and the rest of the material to finish many assemblies.
They picked up much more than just drawings from Aurora; including finished units that that can be shipped and installed, at leased a part of that F/G Inventory which is in Southern California. Being held by the leasing company that got stuck with them when Aurora went under. There is some kind of arrangement between the leasing company and Global on I'd say a 50/50 split of the net after installation on site. Good deal for Global.
YOU CANNOT USE AN IRON, OR WOOD in the factory. Maybe putt, or chip a little, here and there. Shop is at about 20 percent capacity. Full capacity would be 40-50 million a year.
Site is well organized, well equipped and reasonably clean. Everyone seems busy. Maybe 30 cars, trucks and SUV's in the main parking lot.
Currently at 6 million, in nine months fiscal YTD, plus a few days this month. Busy time coming, when its dry and school is out. My opinion and my opinion only they have a shot at 10 million by the end of April.
Now I've gone on long enough, except two things; Shareholder up date coming within 30 Days. News too, but no fluff (ugh, I think some of it via Newswire).
And a full Web Site revamp and full up date, next 30 days.
Enough from me!
Any questions?
First, I'm not buying at this time, but will get money ready, when any upward trend is confirmed. Chipwa1
Good numbers! From zero revenue last year to 17+ MM last Q, from negative to over 20 MM book value, from large loss last year to EPS positive in December. However the presentation itself was high school level at the best. Jay was not in a right mood, and you could see he couldn't waite to get it over with ASAP.
Mike
CONFERENCE CALL REMIINDER ALERT FROM MOBILEPRO CORP.
MobilePro Corp. Announces
Conference Call Webcast
Bethesda, Md., February 14, 2005 -- MobilePro Corp. (OTC Bulletin Board: MOBL) released its Q3 2004 earnings on Monday, February 14.
The company will host a conference call with Chairman and CEO Jay Wright and senior members of the management team following the release at 4:15 p.m. Eastern. The call will cover the company's current strategy and outlook. Wright will open the conference call followed by a question-and-answer session.
To participate in this call, dial toll-free (888) 694-4769 any time after 4:05 p.m. on February 14. International callers should dial (973) 582-2757.
While in conference, anyone experiencing difficulty or requiring operator assistance can press the (*) followed by the (0) button on their telephone to talk to an operator.
A live webcast will be available at
http://viavid.net/dce.aspx?sid=0000225F. An archived version will be posted on the same website for 30 days. The event is optimized for Microsoft's Windows Media Player, version 9 or higher, available at
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/download.
Questions can be directed to Frank Hawkins or Julie Marshall at (305) 852-2383.
Copies of MobilePro Corp. press releases, current price quotes and other valuable information for investors may be found on the websites:
http://www.hawkassociates.com
and
http://www.hawkmicrocaps.com.
Corporate Strategies with Tim Connoly on 2/13/05
(Thanks to Mobile205az, of RB)
This is for people who have not been able to hear the talk show. I have put together the interview transcription also for people who want to read and review what was said on the show. I only transposed the first 20 minutes as it takes a very long time to do.. If anyone wants to complete it that would be great…. and may we have a great 2005…..
Tim: “Our guest tonight is a gentleman that I met; I would think it was about 6 months ago now, Jay Wright. Jay Wright is the CEO of Mobile Pro and Jay and I have become much better friends then of course we were in the beginning, and what I am really impressed with Jay and his company is the ability to execute on a plan. Jay had a plan based on mergers and acquisitions, that we are going to let him talk about, but I think that this company is so impressive Mike, and if you’ll take a look at the chart. Look up Mobile Pro, MOBL, and take a look at that chart; for the last year and the last 30 days Mike. This is a company that since Jay has come on and brought in a new plan and arranged new financing and has gone out there and has made some great acquisitions. This company is going places.”
Mike: “Yeah it looks pretty good!”
Tim: “Yeah, yeah it is just not only technically, but it really has a good plan. And I think without any further delay I would like to welcome Jay Wright to the show. I understand Jay you are there on hold? Welcome to the show.”
Jay: “Tim it’s good to be back.”
Tim:” I guess last time we actually had the interview there, in your near home town anyway, Washington, D.C.”
Jay: “We did. That was a lot of fun to get together and be on live radio together. This time we are doing it over the phone, so it is a little bit different; I feel lonely here Tim, wish you were here.”
Tim: It was always more fun right there in the studio wasn’t it? There is more energy in the studio, but speaking of energy, I have in front of me a chart of your stock for the last 30 days. Jay, this is really wonderful. I mean first of all, I guess before we get into the near-term stuff. I would like you to review for our listeners cause there maybe quite a few people that don’t know the Mobile Pro story. And start back from when you joined the company. Why you did, and what your plans were and what happened since then.
Jay: “Sure, Tim thanks. Umm, this is actually quite an exciting story. I became CEO of Mobile Pro fourteen months ago in December 2003 and Mobile Pro was really in tough shape. It was a stock that was below 2 cents a share, the company was in tough shape financially and it didn’t have a plan and it was sort of going nowhere fast. And I came in with a business plan to aggressively grow the company through acquisitions in the telecommunication space. And we’ve done that. We’ve acquired 14 companies over the last 14 months and built a company from no revenue and a pretty weak balance sheet to where we are today, which is a company that is right around a 100 million run rate, a balance sheet that which we will come out with tomorrow of over 22 million dollars of book equity and a company that has been cash flow positive in terms of EBITA from recurring operations for the last 5 months in a row. So it was a lot of hard work, but it has been a lot of fun so far. But we are just getting started. We have a very aggressive plan towards this next year and continue building the company through acquisition and also some interesting alliances and organic strategies that we’ve got. So we are pretty excited about the opportunity here. The market is still generally good for us. It is still a buyers market. We are able to buy revenue and cash flow fairly cheaply and that is a good thing for our share holders.”
Tim: “Well, I think part of what you did that was smart early on was to do essentially a shelf offering of your stock, so you could go out there into the market when the right opportunity comes and acquire quickly.”
Jay: “Absolutely Tim. I mean the hardest part of executing an aggressive acquisition program is having the money there when you need it. And we put in place 100 million dollar stand-by equity line which as you say it is a shelf registration, back in May of 2004 and we are able to utilize that plus some other financing we were able to put along the way to really execute on our strategy.“
Tim: “Now, 14 acquisitions in a year. Most people would say that, that is a lot to integrate. How are you doing that?”
Jay: Well, we are doing that because we have a top management team. On the voice side of our business we have Tom Mazerski. Tom is a 20 year teleco veteran that is now Verizon that was originally Bell Atlantic and he knows how to run a telecom company and he is doing a terrific job for us on the voice side. On the data side we have a guy by the name of Jack Beech, who runs that unit for us. He had been an ISP owner and operator for about a dozen years before we acquired him last March. He was actually our first acquisition; we did that intentionally cause I knew Jack was a guy who knows how to build a successful ISP. He survived during the meltdown that occurred during 2000-2001 and remained profitable throughout so he has done a terrific job. Out of the 14 acquisitions, 10 of them have been internet service providers and Jack has pieced them together and has really started to squeeze the profits out of them. He has a cost reduction plan that is being implemented both in terms of network and in terms of personnel that will significantly add to the profitability to the combined enterprise. So, the key as in any company, you know Tim, is people. And we have great people here at Mobile Pro.
Tim: “Well apparently the market is beginning to recognize it because when the stock was at 2 cents, we’ll call it 13 months ago because we are just into February and closed on Friday at 23.6 cents; there is nothing like an increase in 12 times to make your shareholders happy.”
Jay: “We have a lot of happy shareholders. We believe that there is still a lot of opportunity ahead of us though. We aren’t even at our 52-week high, which is 29.5 cents that we hit the first half of last year. So we still have room to get to that and we believe based in terms of revenues, profitability, and growth opportunities, that if we execute on our strategy that we should be able to have a very good year this year.”
Tim: “Well you had a very good week. You’ve had terrific volumes; we saw increases in the stock, a significant analyst recommended your stock this week, and you are starting to come out tomorrow with your quarterly results. And I am honored that you are willing to come on our show and talk about those results, which will be released before the opening in the morning and with accordance of Reg FD and all that other stuff. So Jay, tell us what the quarter looks like, what you are going to be reporting tomorrow?”
Jay: “Tim, it is always a pleasure to give your listeners sort of a sneak preview of what’s happening here and let me give you 2 or 3 high level bullet points about what we did this last quarter cause it is a lot of good news. As I already mentioned, we’ve built up our balance sheet to over 22 million dollars of book equity that works out to almost 6.5 cents per basic share outstanding. Remember, a year ago this was a company that negative equity, so we moved it up to where we have a very solid base from our balance sheet perspective. Secondly, we had in our fourth quarter record revenue of over 17 million dollars that we are trending up towards our 100 million dollar run rate. The two big acquisitions we did were during the quarter, so we didn’t get the full benefit.
Tim: What were the two acquisitions Jay?
Jay: Those were Close Call America, which we closed in October and DAVL Communications, which we closed in November. Close Call was a 25 million dollar business, developed 50 million dollar business. We got partial credit in the fourth quarter and we will get full credit on them in the first quarter which is terrific. So our revenue looks good, and probably the biggest news, is that the month of December, Mobile Pro, in the first time in its history showed a positive net income. That is true bottom line positive income for the month of December. After depreciation, amortization, interest, everything. A true bottom line net income which we are very proud of with only a year into this growth story to already be into that category. It puts us in a sort of a unique category for high-growth companies like ours.
Tim: Well in particularly since you intend on implementing this M&A plan, it makes you a much more attractive acquirer too.
Jay: Well, absolutely. It makes our currency more viable, and lowers our cost of capital, and that means a higher return for our shareholders. So we are pretty pleased with that.
Tim: You know, December is a profitable month, for the first time in its history. And you are coming into the first quarter where you will get the full benefit of all the acquisitions so you are talking about a 25 million gross revenue quarter?
Jay: Right around 24.5 to 25 million. There is some seasonality where our winters are lower than our summer rates. So definitely in the 24.5 to 25 million is what we are looking for.
Tim: Now explain that to me, why is your winter rate lower than your summer rate?
Jay: Well, the pricing rates aren’t the same, Tim. The usage on telephones in January both regular phones and payphone division are less than it is in the summer months especially in the north, where you can imagine people don’t typically want to stand outside using a payphone in January.
Tim: That makes sense. Tell us a little bit about, by the way we have a phone call and I might as well ask you this. One of your shareholders called and asked us to ask you what is the disposition of the minority shares of DAVL
Jay: It is a great question. DAVL is part of our acquisition that is 100% senior secured debt in November. We were also assigned about 95% of the common equity under the deal we struck with the lender of the time. We agreed to buy out the remaining 5% within 180 days. That’s underway. We will likely be filing with the SEC in the next couple of weeks to get that cashed out so that will happen on schedule and we will then have 100% of the senior debt as well as 100% of the common of DAVL once that gets cleaned up.
Tim: That caller will be very happy to hear that answer. Now Close Call America, how is that unit doing since you acquired it?
Jay: Tom Mazerski is running that unit for us and is doing a tremendous job. Top line is growing at our 20% compounded on an annualized basis. It is just incredible organic growth. Tom has really cracked the code on how to build a phone business. Great, great job, great growth and also I will tell you about our celluar division after our break.
MOBL DD:
If you are new here, for a good DD I use:
1. As a first step, I use the DD Machine:
http://www.ddmachine.com/default.asp?s=mobl.ob
2. For a better DD I recommend:
http://www.finitesite.com/irishbull/
3. Of course, you should look at the web site:
http://www.mobileprocorp.com/investors.php
While there click on "Careers" and you'll notice the following:
"MobilePro Corp. is experiencing substantial growth and will continue to have significant employment opportunities in 2005.
Please forward your cover letter, resume and salary requirements to jobs@mobileprocorp.com. We appreciate your interest and hope that we are able to develop opportunities that align with your interest in the near future.
Best Regards.
Human Resources"
This is the best sign that MOBL is growing.
Have fun,
Mike
Thanks Mike,
I see MOBL is on the top of the most popular stock on the Board Central. I'm always using it to see what's hot:
http://www.boardcentral.com/
Mike
It might if the dilution stops, or if it goes up at a slower page compared with the net revenue increase.
Anyone here:
1. has called recently to find out the last OS figure?
2. has a good estimate of expected numbers? The Q should be out next week (if they are not late as usual).
3. has been able to get in touch with the Mgmt? I tried to but never got above the public relations level. If anyone has a direct E-mail that I can use to communicate with the Mgmt, I would appreciate you posting it here.
I used to be in, but got out a while ago (before the big drop). So before I get a chance do redo my own DD on it, I can use any pertinent info anyone can provide. I might get back in, but only after the Q is released.
TIA,
Mike
"This stock should soar over the next 6 months"
***MOBL should be a big short-term winner. See why:
1. Great charts:
http://quotes.barchart.com/texadv.asp?sym=mobl
2. Don’t forget to listen tonight:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050208/fltu004_1.html
3. And, of course, don’t forget to listen to Jay’s CC tomorrow at 4:15, about the Q3 results:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050207/flm010_1.html
4. And on March 24-th Micro Cap Investors Summit:
http://www.wallstreetreporter.com/mis/
PS: On another board (RB) someone (hssbwwmp, Msg. 89679 ) claims to have received an E-mail alert from Tobin Smith saying that: MOBL is "Operating at the nexus of the wireless and broadband telecom ChangeWaves,Mobilepro is strikingly similar to NeoMedia in its visionary management, its capital structure, and its potential to hit a five- or ten-bagger." (from Tobin Smith Email Alert)
Mike
Jfburk, I hope you read the recent SEC fillings: SB-2 of 2/3/05, 8-K of 2/2/05, the "4" forms, and so on:
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/filings.jsp?symbol=GTEL
If I were you (and everyone else here), I would read these forms before deciding you want to be a "long."
I would like you to read the "6 Deadly Mistakes" people usualy make. See below.
Check out especially # 6: "invest a little more when others are scared of the stock market" (you should have bought this when it was below 0.07, two months ago)..."and sell your winners when others start to get greedy" (today was a good day to sell, IMO).
PS: I'm not here to bash GTEL, but I hate to see all these newbies getting at the hights. Recently (when it was in mid 0.4's) I adviced the same on a MBAH board, and people did't like it. Hope, at least (at 0.12 or so), some people would say thanks if they indeed have listen to my suggestion. That's all, and because I have no shares here right now, this will be my last Msg. here. If and when I decide to get in (for a short play, that is), I'll post again.
Best regards and good luck to all,
Mike
------------------------
6 Deadly Mistakes
(Source: Monthley Fool Stock Advisor)
1. At the top of the list-you guessed it-don't simply settle for investing in "the market."
We're not predicting what the market will do in 2005. We're simply stating the obvious truth that many individual stocks will do better. Don't pass up the extra wealth that can be rightfully yours.
2. Don't let the media headlines sway you from your path.
It's easy to get bummed-out by the newspaper or evening news and do nothing with your investments. But remember, "bad news sells" -- and that's virtually all you hear about...the macro forces -- like high oil prices or rising interest rates -- that cause temporary storms in "the market."
Focus on the micro, the individual companies doing great right now, instead. That's where you'll find all the investing success you need to put a big smile on your face.
3. Don't just buy what everybody else loves.
Human nature being what it is, this is an easy trap to fall into. But it can be a deadly one you must resist. WorldCom, Enron and Global Crossing were all Wall Street darlings-before the bottom fell out.
While you shouldn't ignore any given stock just because it's popular, that's not a good enough reason to buy it either. Oftentimes, you'll find the best-and safest-profits by investing in great, but "unloved" companies everyone else is ignoring.
Cases in point from Motley Fool Stock Advisor: little-known auto-supplier Borg Warner (up 98% for us so far); scorned Martha Stewart Omnimedia (a 48% winning position); and comic-book company Marvel, bought before the big Spiderman hit for 426% gains so far.
4. Don't let your emotions get the better of you.
Sounds simple, but it's not. Tom Gardner recently interviewed a great investor and author of one of my favorite books ever, Quality of Earnings. If ever there was a guy you'd expect to keep his cool, it would be Thornton O'glove.
But he sold all his stocks shortly after the 1987 crash-the worst thing he could have done and completely opposite everything he had learned. That is simply emotion trumping judgment, and it can happen to anyone.
5. Don't bet your future on "conflicted advice."
By "conflicted," we mean taking advice from professionals who are compensated according to how often they trade you in and out of stocks -- and charge high fees to do it. In many cases, that's a clear case of conflict of interest.
Many investors pay a pro 1% of their holdings...to put them in mutual funds that under-perform the market by 2 1/2%...then see huge tax consequences because of that pro's active trading. You end up with sub-bond returns while taking all the risks inherent in stock investing. Don't do it.
6. DON'T let fear -- or greed -- destroy you financially.
Take some time to look at the history of the market. You'll see euphoric highs followed by devastating plunges. You'll see depressing lows followed by spectacular gains. Our advice: Buy great companies on a regular basis...invest a little more when others are scared of the stock market...and sell your winners when others start to get greedy.
Take those words to heart, and you will be more successful than 95% of the people you meet.
Below 0.15 is a good entry point, IMO. And it will be reach in less than 2 weeks, IMO.
Once the Company stops dumping their shares, small volume will take the PPS down. Plus, with over 1B OS, a capitallization value of over 300M is not justifiable, or sustainable. Just look at the balance sheet: the company was surviving by selling shares for quite sometimes now.
The rule of tumb for growth companies is a capitalization of up to 2 x the revenue. Since the company is still in the red ink, and assuming a capitalization factor of 1.5 x gross reveue, this gives you a PPS of 0.15.
This is of course, AJIMHO. Do your DD:
http://www.ddmachine.com/default.asp?s=gtel.ob
or for a more complete DD one can use:
http://www.finitesite.com/irishbull/
Mike
I wonder if after meeting with Jay on Sunday (and finding out about the growth rate here), that "cleaver" Tim Connolly "guru" will still advice his sheep to: "We recommend initiating a one-third position up to 20 cents and another one-third if the stock pulls back below 16 cents." For such a stupid advice, I would drop his advicing service right away. He (Tim) is nothing but an arrogant, stupid self-proclaimed guru, and if I were Jay, I would terminate right away any relationship with this individual, and his organization.
Mike
Pirate, same 2 you. This one will be a big winner indeed. Give it some time. All it needs is to start selling some of the 8 (4 new) products. With that in mind, I'm still loading.
Mike
Quacker, not only that I'm here, but I've been loading quite a bit lately. I'll add more next week, if the price stays below 0.07.
The Aurora deal announcement (according to the last PR) is already due. But, as usual Phill doesn't pay enough attention to these things. He's always late filling the Q's, and everything else. Nonetheless, I feel good about the prospects here. Real company, real business, and (after the Aurora deal goes through), with a good possibility of expanding.
Mike
-----------------------------
"was hoping we would hold the gain we had ,if it drops some more i am buying a few more shares i still think this is going to be a good stock for a long term hold jmo."
10Q SEC Filling:
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001108017%252D05...
Look at the financials (starting on page 19). The business is picking up. The PPS should start improving as well.
Bought more this morning. This should start moving.
Mike
Q3 Revenue Prediction:
(Source: Mister_B, from another board):
---------------------
Following are some conservative, realistic estimates for MOBL’s Q3:
Revenue - $18.5M - $20M
Net Loss - $4M - $5.5M.
EPS – ($0.01 – $0.015)
What is this based on?
**Pro-rated financials of each acquired company from the time of acquisition.
**Each ‘Operating Department’ - ISP, Voice and ‘NeoReach’ Divisions for Revenue/Expense totals.
**Assumes 4.5M in operating expenses at Corporate level ($2M - $2.5M one time charges for acquisitions made during the qtr.)
**Assumes the 300k in synergies realized with Affinity and Close Call.
The following unknowns were not included and could drastically change how the financials look:
*Possible part of the $18M gain by DAVL
*Possible use of tax credit for EBITDA as discussed on the board
*Interest DAVL will have to pay on their Debt to MOBL (I am unsure if DAVL will have to pay this interest to MOBL in this Q, if MOBL has ‘excused’ the interest payments, etc. This would have a big impact on MOBL’s financials).
For MOBL to have positive EPS, they may use one or two or all three of the "Unknowns" or some constructive accounting. I am unsure of how these will be used and how any use of the ‘unknowns’ will impact the financial statements.
I will say that I bet the operations of the Voice and ISP divisions will look very good (and you’ll be able to see them segmented in part of the filing), but due to Corporate expenses, the financials will not look the best. Investment banks will be very interested in the performance of each of the Operating division (ISP & Voice).
--------------------
PS: If Mister_B is correct (and even my more conservative estimate of 15MM), this will add up another significant data pint on the exponential growth over the last 4 Q's: 4.968MM, 1.17MM 311K, and Zero.
Prediction: If GTEL, with three times as many shares, and 5 times less revenue could reach over 0.33 today, I expect (after Sunday's talk show, and the Q3 release on Monday) MOBL should easilly go higher than that. Because of the above, I'm sticking to my 0.5 to 0.6 short-term opinion.
Mike