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.
I suppose the "shareholders will be very pleased by next years SHM" statement made at last years SHM is finally sinking in. No one wants to attend this year because management no longer has any credibility for what they spout off about at the meeting.
And then there's the whole issue of Clark's departure without a word. So far his replacement hasn't been much of an inspiration to anyone. I still believe Clark resigned on a Friday and left the company scrambling over the weekend to find someone, anyone, who would agree to step up so they could announce his replacement on Monday and make it appear this was all planned months in advance. Yes sir, I imagine there were many phone calls made that weekend in a desperate attempt to save face.
Yeah, sure... months in advance, but not enough time for Clark to prepare a few departing words? Who leaves next? Johnson? Phipps? Estrella? Is our new chairman going to take a position in the company with his own cash? That might inspire some confidence in the future direction of this company.
A shame for their stock of rose-colored glasses to go to waste. I suppose they can donate the unused bottled water to the homeless shelter and take a tax write off, not that it's needed.
Doubtful if any of the faithful will attend while the share price is 2 to 3 cent range.
Great news for the company, though. No Powerpoint presentations to prepare, no bullet lists of accomplishments, no need for the cases of rose-colored glasses to hand out to attendees. They'll even save on the bill for the free bottled water.
A sure win for the company, even while the share price is in the toilet.
Clark stated at the last SHM there would be NO REVERSE SPLIT!
He probably took off when he realized with the LJ financing, they will chew through the current authorized shares, leaving no other option but to increase the authorized again and then do the reverse. He'd have to eat those words and he wasn't going to hang around for that.
I'm sure when it's eventually announced, the rose-colored glasses crowd will change their tune and claim it's necessary and a good move by management for the benefit of shareholders. I can't wait to hear the spin on the sunshine they'll be blowing up shareholders asses at this year's love fest. Maybe another prediction that we'll all be very happy with the share price by next year's meeting.
Should have dumped this turd when it spiked above a nickel. Even if the current downward spiral is not the result of dumping by LJ or Brio or Hudson Bay, there are enough shareholders with shares in the millions of shares range that could start dumping at any time after reaching their breaking point with the unfulfilled promises made by management. If a couple of those investors started unloading, the price would be in the toilet... where it is today.
Agreed, better than nothing... kinda like a car maker who can't sell their car, but gives away free wiper blades along with a test drive.
The trend toward releasing "contract" announcements without any reported dollar figure isn't setting well with me. Shareholders can dream up any scenario they want to explain it, but it's starting to smell like this company is going nowhere.
And we still haven't heard a peep from our new Chairman. Does this ship even have a rudder, or did Clark take it with him on his departure? Who is writing the checks now... Phipps?
Yes, it's a limited video for a reason. You're assuming the reason is classified and I'm assuming nothing. For all we know, the airship can't get to 5000 feet and that's why we've never seen a video of the airship being a small speck in the sky.
Surely you don't mean to suggest that free-flight testing was done in Nevada based solely on this video clip showing the airship puttering around at no more than 100 feet off the ground, do you?
At the conclusion of the Yuma testing, Estrella stated that tethered testing was completed and the airship was cleared for free-flight testing. Now it seems all we've accomplished in Nevada is more tethered testing. No mention of free-flight testing at all in the PR.
I'm not assuming anything based on some crappy video showing the airship sputtering around where the ground is still visible in every scene. I'm sure many here believe the airship has been tested a high altitude, but to my knowledge we've never seen that stated in a press release, nor have we seen any video showing the airship more than a couple of hundred feet off the ground. The 20K feet seems far out of reach to me.
Wildwest stated that testing takes YEARS. This company doesn't have years. They are nearly insolvent, and with the continued crappy share price, it doesn't seem likely the LJ funding will be forthcoming without extreme dilution.
Maybe Clark left because he knew he couldn't keep his promise of no reverse split going forward. Anyone ever think of that? He expected the share price to rise and the LJ funding to happen without further share dilution. That didn't happen. How the hell are we supposed to get to Nasdaq with 500 million shares issued and the vast majority of those being in the float, and more free-trading dilution coming our way if the LJ funding is tapped? I'm beginning to think Clark saw the light at the end of the tunnel, and realized it was the train.
We are back to tethered testing? I thought we had completed the tethered portion back at Yuma.
Does the company have to reaccomplish tethered testing certification every time they test at a new facility? Seems like a big waste of time to reinvent the wheel for each round of testing.
Sorry, bill77b. That 100K trade at 0.0425 was mostly mine. Picked up 80K+ at that price. It wasn't someone dumping as I saw stated on another board.
Had some extra cash and decided to lower my average. Would love to see a much higher price by the SHM.
Here's the link to the article, but there's no mention of the $25.7M, just the same story put out by WSGI.
http://www.militaryaerospace.com/news/2012/05/16/global-telesat-awarded-u-s-navy-contract-for-mobile-satellite-equipment.html
Agreed. I hope next week we learn more details to alleviate some of the concerns of shareholders.
This management team is supposed to be all about transparency... at least that's what they've been barking since taking over. Or was that Clark saying that, and now that he's gone, things will be different?
Correction... BJ didn't say she couldn't reveal how much of Hudson Bay shares were left... she said she wasn't sure how much was left.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=73053579
Wasn't sure? ... with required weekly updates from Hudson Bay and Brio? We know how many shares were issued, we know how much has been sold each week, if we assume they are reporting as required. If not, there are stipulations in the judgement that clearly allows the company to recoup the funds obtained for the shares sold that exceed the limits spelled out in the judgement.
"I'm not sure" doesn't cut it in my book. Not for management we consider professional and competent. How about "I'm not sure, but I'll update my figures and get back to you." Or maybe she misplaced her calculator.
Am I being unreasonable here?
I don't agree. This management team has exhibited odd behavior over the last few months.
First BJ informs certain shareholders who ask about the progress of the Hudson Bay and Brio sell-off. We all know they are required by their litigation agreement to keep BJ informed weekly of their respective shares sold that week. We've seen large volumes of shares traded for months, and when we see a sharp drop in daily volume and naturally wonder if these firms are still dumping shares, and ask BJ for clarification if they are done, she claims she can't reveal that information. Huh? Why the hell not, since she previously revealed it? What's the big secret?
Then we see the newsletter installment with not a single mention of the company's flagship product, the Argus One. Huh?
Next we see the Chairman resign without as much as a "goodbye, good luck shareholders". Thanks, Mike.
Now we see 2 GTC contract announcements a week apart that fail to mention any dollar amount. WTF? Not even an explanation as to the reason no dollar amounts were released, or if those amounts will be forthcoming when certain details are finalized. What, are we doing pro-bono work now for the Red Cross and the Navy? I admit I may be ignorant on such matters, but I have never seen a contract announcement in ANY company I've ever invested in where the amount of the contract wasn't disclosed in the news release announcing the contract.
I fully understand and support compliance with disclosure rules, but why all the flip-flopping on what can and cannot be revealed to shareholders? And if the contracts are so good for the company, why can't the contract amount be revealed? Are we afraid our creditors with judgements in hand will be lining up at the door to collect?
What happened to the transparency we were promised? "Yes, we got these great contracts that validates the quality of our products and services. Contract amounts? Sorry, that information can't be revealed. Trust us, and don't believe any other source of information, including government web sites describing details of the contract award."
I've been tossing around thoughts of why management wouldn't release the dollar amount of the contracts. Is it possible these GTC contracts fall into that business area specifically designated by the GTC purchase agreement where revenues flows to Phipps' U.K. interests and not to WSGI? Is this a possibility?
Feel free to discuss, without killing the messenger. Just a thought that crossed my mind.
A new Chairman with the right connections, perhaps?
I keep that thought in the back of my mind, but I think a precursor to that would be elimination or settlement of the debt situation. If there are substantial revenues coming from these contracts, they should get the IRS issue behind us ASAP, then focus on the other debt.
But $25 million doesn't equate to $25 million in profits. We don't know how much profit will be generated from those sales. But it's a start, and we have to start somewhere. I'm hoping more and larger ones will follow.
Good point. Another thing that comes to mind is the remaining debt, and that may be one of the reasons the contract amounts weren't mentioned in the press releases. I suppose they could keep the actual amounts hidden until they have to report the revenues in the quarterly statements, if that is their goal.
Who has enough shares to do this, the MM's?.
Maybe Warp is unloading as someone suggested on the other board. But why, if the recent contract announcements are real ($25M was stated for the Navy one), and the company expects to sell airships in 2012?
Maybe it's just the overall market is down over fears of Europe's economic problems.
They are supposed to be in the middle of the launch of their business plan, so I'll expect an update in the coming months. I picked up shares really low, and will be adding more soon. My target is 2-3 years down the road.
Another setback for Globalstar, and likely to affect future GTC business opportunities unless Globalstar and Thales can reach a new agreement to continue the build-out. The return of profitability of the GTC business model and attraction of new business is highly dependent on the continued build-out of this generation of new Globalstar satellites. Hope they can work this out and continue the progress.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/globalstar-announces-regarding-commercial-arbitration-210000173.html
Globalstar Announces Update Regarding Commercial Arbitration With Thales Alenia Space
COVINGTON, La., May 16, 2012 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Globalstar, Inc., ("Globalstar" or the "Company") today announced the decision of the arbitrators in the commercial arbitration concerning its 2009 satellite manufacturing contract with Thales Alenia Space France ("Thales"). The arbitrators ruled that Thales has no further obligation to manufacture or deliver satellites under Phase 3 of the contract. Phase 3 provided for Globalstar's option to purchase up to 23 second-generation satellites in addition to the 25 satellites purchased in the first two phases under the contract. Although the Company and Thales may agree to other terms, the arbitrator's ruling also requires Globalstar to pay Thales approximately EUR 53 million in termination charges by June 9, 2012. Globalstar and Thales have already initiated post-ruling discussions to seek mutually agreeable solutions without which there are likely to be materially negative consequences to Globalstar, including with respect to its debt agreements, ongoing work with Thales and business operations.
"Although we had hoped for a different outcome, we have been in constant contact with Thales over the last several months as completion of Phase 2 satellites continues, and over the past days to negotiate acceptable terms for ordering additional satellites. Having already paid over EUR 450 million to Thales and having experienced satellite delivery delays approaching two years, we remain hopeful that a mutually acceptable agreement can be reached," said Jay Monroe, Chairman and CEO of Globalstar. Mr. Monroe added, "Globalstar has been operating under extremely challenging circumstances for the past few years as a result of delayed satellite deliveries and remains amenable to negotiating a positive resolution with Thales."
You guarantee Gotcha can't prove Clark was terminated. I can believe that. At the same time, I guarantee you can't prove Clark left on good terms as part of a planned departure/replacement.
Is that the correct state of this discussion?
Who stated Clark left of his own accord? You, wasn't it? Was that hearsay or did you hear it from Clark?
I just read a post by GS claiming Clark was shown the door, and he was asked to prove it. I don't remember anyone asking you to prove your statement that Clark's departure was planned all along.
Just playing the devil's advocate here. Both claims should be proven or changed to opinions only, not facts.
As far as Clark and Estrella putting the FEMA call to rest at the SHM, that was reported here, but from what I read of the claims, Clark wasn't on the call at all, so how would he know what transpired, other than what Estrella told him?
Not trying to rehash all of this, as it was almost a year ago, but I am still wondering why Clark left without a word to shareholders. Maybe things between Clark and Estrella weren't as rosy as some think, and Clark finally had enough. It's as good a theory as any other theory presented here. The planned departure seems to have taken root, but was that verified with anyone, and if so, by who?
BTW, Christian liked to talk about himself a lot too, and he had some departing words from looking back at the press release.
Warp was referring to Estrella botching the FEMA call, not Clark. Doesn't look like Clark had anything to do with the call. He was CEO of Butterfield Fulcrum at the time. I checked the posts made back in June 2010 to verify this. It was Estrella on the call, not Clark.
So I don't believe the board would have had any issues with Clark in reference to any possible FEMA business.
Agreed, maybe a small contract to test the water, to evaluate the capabilities of the company before committing to larger contracts.
c'mon airlift... Huff and crew reported to have $120M or so in revenues coming in. Problem was, they couldn't identify where the money was, or where it went, or if it even existed.
I hear the U.S. Government has the same problem with the TARP funds. LOL
There's a slight change in wording from the statement in the annual report issued 3 months ago.
From the 10-K: We expect to generate revenue from the sale of our airships at least within the next 12 months.
From today's 10-Q: We anticipate generating revenues from the sale of our airships in 2012...
At least the statements are consistent. If they had used "within the next 12 months" in this report, I'd be concerned things weren't progressing as planned. I'm not getting my hopes up of an airship contract before the SHM, but more likely in the latter half of the year given their recent announcement of more scheduled DoD testing in Nevada. But hopefully the new Chairman's connections can bring some R&D funding or GTC contracts that will help lift the share price before the meeting.
1st paragraph, page 8:
Additional cash will be needed to support our ongoing operations until such time that operations provide sufficient cash flow to cover expenditures. We are currently pursuing both short and long-term financing options from private investors as well as through institutional investors. We are also working to commercialize our Argus One airship, our aerostats and GTC products to begin generating revenues from customers. We anticipate generating revenues from the sale of our airships in 2012 and are already generating revenue from our GTC products...
Let's hope they are close and are making this statement with some confidence.
Nicely stated, bill77b. It's hard to imagine someone putting that much into a penny stock. Was it a penny stock back in those days?
I tend to agree with your views on Clark leaving. We'll likely never know the real story. If the company succeeds, no one will care, including Clark, assuming he holds his shares. I recall reading somewhere that a departing officer is required to report sales for 4 or 6 months? Maybe someone else here knows the reporting requirements for a departing officer and can post them? I'm dead tired and heading to bed. The caffeine is no longer keeping me awake. lol
It'll all work out one way or the other, and unless someone has sunk their life savings in this, it won't matter much if the result is not what we wished for.
Trusting in Him as well,
- Jack
That seems to be the central theme for investors in this company. Holding on for years with success just around the next turn. Guilty of this myself. I got into this because of Mike Clark and his reputation. I almost dumped my shares when he resigned, but now the new guy seems to offer some promise... so I'll hold a little longer, just like everyone else is doing.
Seriously, have any longs actually sold out and moved on? It seems most are still here. I click on names of posters and see posts going back 5 years or more. Hope I don't fall into that trap, but I can see how easy it is to fall into the trap. What is it the experts say?... "Don't fall in love with an investment."
runandadd, I share in your frustration, as do many others here. Some have compared the company's inability to sell an airship to Kroplin's inability to sell his segmented airship design. There could be some truth to that, looking back. Potential customers are interested in the design, but not so much to cause them to award contracts.
The hybrid design makes a lot of sense and may have the potential to break the mold. I think it's apparent now those working on the airship design have listened to potential customers and modified the capability of the Argus platform to meet their needs. The big question remains... will these potential customers actually buy them? We'd all love to see the Army pony up a contract for 10 or 20 of these before the shareholders meeting.
Buoyancy balloons... never considered that. Maybe they can have a couple of large helium-filled balloons attached on either side of the tether. When the tether is released, it remains aloft and can be reeled in back to the ground station and the tether never falls to the ground. This would also eliminate the excessive buoyancy problem for the now released airship.
Now, think about what this would look like from the ground with the tether attached.
Just a comment on the hybrid. If they have filed a provisional patent, doesn't that mean they've pretty much finalized the design and tested it? Could this be ready for sale now or in the near future?
BBB, I'm not suggesting Clark reveal to shareholders his personal reason for leaving. I'm saying I find it strange he said nothing, not even a parting statement to the faithful shareholders and sharing his excitement of getting the company to the point of entering the next phase of operation under Mr. Bocchichio.
Doesn't feel like there's much excitement or well wishes going forward from the departing Chairman when nothing is said. I re-read Clark's comments in his outline of strategic goals for 2012. His lack of any departing comments now brings those comments into question in my mind. You may feel differently and that's fine with me.
I suppose it's pointless to continue discussing it, so I'll drop it.
Maybe they have a parachute on the end of the tether so it floats down. Or if it's used on the border, the cable would likely land on all those illegal immigrants crossing the border, and would be cushioned in the fall.
I'm thinking about higher payload vs reduced time on station trade-offs. With the airship acting as an aerostat with surveillance payload attached, which has been limited thus far to about 30 pounds, the tether also adds weight that would be compensated for by adding additional helium (and therefore less fuelgas).
Seems to me if the tether is released and the airship begins free flight, some helium would needed to be bled off to maintain neutral bouancy, since the weight of the tether is no longer a factor and the airship would become significantly lighter.
Anyone have any idea what a power-providing tether would weigh per thousand feet of length?
So I'll ask the same question you asked of flybyday... how do you know anyone formerly associated with the company is hounding management? Is this the same crew some believe is holding the share price down?
I'm starting to get confused here with all the claims of things the former crew is doing. Bearslayre claims the old crew is dumping shares to hold the share price down, but you claim they're trying to get management to promote the share price using penny stock promoters? One claim directly contradicts the other. What are we to believe?
I tend to agree with you on Clark looking for a decent ROI, but he departed without a word. I certainly didn't see that coming, and it continues to bug me that he said nothing. The man couldn't take 2 minutes and type a sentence or two in an email to be included in the PR? Perhaps he did and they chose not to include the comments.
Who is our hairless friend? Sorry, over my head. And what's with the spine comment?
moosh, I share in your curiosity. If there truly is a pipeline of new business or contracts headed our way, and LJ was given a peek at this pipeline in order to secure the funding, why the need for penny stock promotions? There's nothing better to spend the company's limited funds on than penny stock promotions?
One could argue this smells like the tactics of those in the former regime. I'm sure when current management uses these tactics, some in that camp will claim it's all good and proper business. Or could it be they are so desperate to move the share price since all else has failed, they'll try anything? Just asking the question.
I don't believe anyone posting here knows the real reason Clark left, regardless of what they imply... nothing but their opinion, and equally as likely to be right or wrong as any other opinion posted. But it is amusing to read of "the plan", or something overheard second hand from an informal conversation a year ago. I still think the fact he didn't leave any statement on his departure is the best indicator of all, and the most troubling. One would expect a Chairman passing the baton to the next Chairman capable of leading shareholders to the next stage would have a few departing comments for the shareholders, if one were to assume everything is going as planned.
So your opinion is they know what's in the pipeline and agreed to extending the funding to WSGI, but the terms simply protect them in case management doesn't deliver the contracts.
Let's hope your opinion is correct, and that whatever is in the pipeline is realized.
nilremerlin, I'd love to help you out here with your theory and unload some shares... except that I don't like taking LOSSES.
For some reason, I still hold out a twinkle of hope this will all work out and I can sell at some point for a GAIN.
I'll review the terms again and get back to you.
Making money is my motive as well. I had a lot of faith in management when they came on board, but the current share price doesn't exactly inspire confidence in management's ability to deliver.
I do hope you're correct, and that LJ is aware of what's in the pipeline and will hold for higher share prices. My concern is what if nothing's in the pipeline, and this financing was nothing more than a last-ditch effort to keep the company afloat for a while longer?
Assuming what's been posted regarding the terms of the financing is correct, it seems LJ can profit from this deal regardless of what happens to the share price. Therein lies my concern as to whether this was a smart move for the company to agree to such terms. LJ may have been the only funding they could find, and could set whatever terms they wanted.
Thank you for your opinion on what I should do with my shares. I'll be sure to let you know if I sell and move on. My faith in management will ultimately depend on whether or not they deliver the goods and a higher share price. I assure you if they do, I'll give them plenty of praise for their accomplishments.
flybyday, may I ask what you think the motive is, then?
Why would management agree to financing terms that seem to give LJ the ability to sell at will and tank the share price, yet still profit from their transactions? If that wasn't the motive, why even sign a funding agreement giving them that option?
I'm not saying I believe that's what they are planning to do, and I certainly hope not, but it doesn't look like the company has any means to stop them if they do, leaving the company to award LJ an astronomical amount of shares to make up the difference as the share price declines, which can certainly be driven lower by their selling.
Are these the best terms these investment bankers could get? Death-spiral financing? I had much higher hopes when they came on board and their reputations were instrumental in my decision to invest.
This is one of my primary concerns for the continued depression of the share price as the company moves forward, even as they execute contracts. Some here believe a couple of contracts will propel this stock to the moon. I believe the large number of outstanding shares currently held by shareholders, plus the new free-trading shares being issued, can overwhelm and quench any increased demand for the stock if those shareholders start unloading their shares, just as Hudson Bay and Brio Capital have done.
This may be a long uphill battle to get the share price to any significant levels given our current share structure. I realize it is what it is, but as more shares get issued, I start to feel the reverse split Clark stated wouldn't happen is becoming a more likely scenario than not.
For the conspiracy theorists who continue to believe someone or some group is somehow holding the share price down by dumping shares into the market, this statement should completely overshadow those petty concerns. One thing that continues to puzzle me concerning those claims, and Raymer's shares have been tossed into the accusations, is how many shares does this mysterious cabal have to unload? Seems they would be out of shares by now, wouldn't they? Now that Raymer's shares have been shown to be steady and not decreasing (if we are to believe the drop in shares is related to expiring options), who is supplying these shares to dump?