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.
The net profit over 2013 and 2014 has been hurt by the Clipstream investments without any Clipstream sales. When a new product is due to come out, the activity to sell older solutions drops way off. I believe what little Clipstream G1 software was sold in 2011 and 2012 disappeared. The crummy pricing on the UMG global contract did the rest - IMO.
Secure video is what matters most to specific customers.
When you can charge for Music Videos, you need to secure it.
The quality is pretty good for most low-end devices, but it doesn't look HD on Hi-Res screens.
I ran the beta-video yesterday on a slow 0.85 Mbps connection and the quality was pretty good. Not HD, but good enough for marketing videos, training videos, and music videos unless you are looking at cleavage. High Action videos need the HD quality which is why the high-action Movie trailer demos are a poor choice for showing off Clipstream G2 except that people will play them over other options.
I wonder if the new UMG contract will contain any Clipstream G2 services pricing.
Private Music Videos should be a big hit to allow artists to charge fans to view private music videos before songs are played on local radio.
Clipstream would be great for that. It would also encourage more bands to use Play MPE, if they use Clipstream G2 for pre-release music videos.
The watermark position changes on the video file quite often.
It would be very difficult to scrub it completely off. You could change the 'watermark color' to a less visible color, but it would still be visible. If the video background didn't change, editing software might be able to swap out image backgrounds. in changing backgrounds that would not be practical.
Destiny can also stamp a User ID on the video just like the article that you provided illustrates how the reviewer was identified by the unique watermark.
That is good news.
I am getting a Download Timeout error - probably due to my slower speed ISP. Destiny will get that fixed soon.
Is the Video Quality better than the comparable Youtube trailer?
Neither can I. My network speed is under 2 Mbps. I have found this problem before when Destiny disabled the speed adjustment mechanism for slower networks while they worked on quality for the top speed.
I would like to a review from someone who can run this version - probably at speeds about 4 Mpbs.
While this beta version seems to be flawed, the beta page is an attempt by Destiny management to be honest with investors. Investors can see something change - which is important too.
I decided to buy back 100k+ DSNY shares at a decent price as sellers kept the price down with big blocks for sale.
I am curious about the Mad Max Showcase video with the 'Yahoo Videos' brand in the right corner. Until now, I didn't know Yahoo was producing its own movies or securing the distribution rights to movies. Yahoo isn't going to use Youtube to promote their movies since that is a competitor, so Clipstream could secure a rather large Clipstream customer for video ads at least.
The Star Wars promotional video will be EVERYWHERE this year if Clipstream actually wins that ad contract. Disney will likely promote that movie with the largest advertising budget in worldwide history given the strength of the Star Wars franchise and the delay since the last trilogy. Clipstream may be ready for a lot of business this summer and fall. Only a tiny sliver of that advertising budget could be significant to Destiny.
Video processing speed will not be a problem for Clipstream as new mobile devices gain more power and faster networks. Up to 150 Mbps - Wow!
http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s5-processor-detailed-qualcomm-snapdragon-801-worldwide-25318382/
Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 processor embedded in Galaxy S5 phones.
The Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 assists with the Samsung Galaxy S5’s image processing. This processor also commands the mobile graphics on the Galaxy S5, of course, for video, still images, and gaming - this bit owing largely to the embedded Adreno 330 GPU.
The Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 works with fully integrated 4G LTE Advanced connectivity. This means that - where available - networks will be able to deliver speeds of up to 150Mbps, while the chipset also offers the possibility of dual-SIM connectivity. One Samsung Galaxy S5 model thus far - in China - will be bringing dual-SIM/dual active (DSDA) capabilities.
2013 10K - No Warrants Outstanding.
'As at August 31, 2013, the Company had no common stock warrants outstanding. A summary of common stock warrant activity as of August 31, 2012 and changes during the year ended August 31, 2012 are presented below:'
Merry Christmas to you all too.
I won't discuss any more details before Christmas to avoid causing many of you stress.
I am making no claims here. I am very confused by the facts that do not line up in a straight line.
If Mr. Morelli is a key architect of this solution, why does the company grant a million shares to Mr. Biasini - for virtualization technology develop at his promotional marketing company?
How was Promotional Depot using that technology prior to the Sphere 3D agreement?
Why not buy the Promotional Depot company outright, to snap up the great employees who built the virtualization technology rather than just compensate Mr. Biasini for the technology?
The only thing I see in the video on the Promotional Depot website is a mention of 'Virtual training' and 'Virtual Devices'. There is nothing else concrete about Virtualization solutions.
I find it interesting that Mr. Morelli's expertise is critical for the virtualization technology according to Scott's interview, while their last quarterly report states the following:
'On December 31, 2010, the Company acquired all rights and assets related to the emulation and virtualization technology from Promotion Depot Inc., in a non-arms length transaction, in exchange for 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. Since the fair value of the assets received are not readily determinable, the investment was valued based on the $695,000 fair value of the shares received by Promotion Depot Inc.'
The Promotion Depot connection is through Mr. Biasini, not Mr. Morelli unless Mr Morelli was working with Mr. Biasini at Promotion Depot.
I found the Promotion Depot website:
http://www.promodepot.ca/index.html
I am glad to hear a rational opinion - open to discuss issues.
I am not declaring Sphere 3D as a flop - just one with some unknowns and questions that remain to be answered.
The big three stocks are reasonable bets that are on a good track, I just do not like the website claims from Sphere 3D without some supporting, reasonable facts.
Thanks for your comments.
I reviewed the last 3 quarters of financial statements for SPIHF.
They had 200,000 in wages last quarter and about 400,000 per quarter in 1Q and 2Q. So that is 1,000,000 in wages and consulting over 9 months.
I would like to hear some guesses about how those wages are divided between the executives, other staff, and developers.
Wow - that was a long summary of issues and comments.
Why don't I contact SPIHF executives?
I have too many concerns about their lack of software, lack of patents and other concerns previously discussed to invest in this company. It would be a waste of my time and their management time for any discussion. I am personally averse to investing in companies with fluffy promotional websites that lack substance that support important claims - however true those claims might be. I also like to compare the company against its competition, which I am doing with the HPTO comparison. SPIHF offers a Corel Office solution in Beta, while HPTO offers a Microsoft Office solution tailored for the iPad. HPTO's Android tablet version will be out in early 2014.
I also need to investigate the patent applications in more detail. Maybe there is something valid to the 3 published patent documents that is revealing.
While a profile of HPTO states they have 37 employees and over $6 million in revenues, I do not know how many employees SPIHF has. They can't be very big with only 400k in 2012 revenues with a handful of executives making 100k or so. Without many employees, who is doing all of the development for this great software?
I also haven't dug into their quarterly financials since they are a Canadian company that does not report to the SEC quarterly.
If at least three software users report positively about the Corel Office Beta software, I would be less critical of their solutions.
As far as Overland Storage goes, I do not fault Mr. Kelley from wanting a partnership with SPIHF since the company is struggling to make a profit. The OVRL stock price is currently under $1 and the company is in worse financial shape than SPIHF or HPTO.
Corel is also in a bind on how to promote their software to the masses so that they do not get left behind. They are competing against Google Docs and Microsoft Office solutions - two tough market leaders. So a partnership with Corel makes sense for both parties.
zstockings, These are Patent Applications only - not granted patents.
Your Patent Observer website does not display this important detail.
The three US patent applications were filed in January 2013 which is how the year appears on the Patent ID. It takes several years to get patents approved.
Use - www.uspto.gov for the US patents.
I haven't looked into the Canadian patents, but according to the Research published in October, all the Canadian records are patent applications too.
Ouch - I am bleeding profusely from my wound.
On the other hand, the company's description on IHub states.
'Sphere 3D, a software technology company focuses on developing mobile device solutions for seamless functionality of cloud based software. Its patented software has paved the way for greater productivity, choice and convenience.'
(1) They have no patents, so that is a lie by the management team.
(2) They have not paved the way for anything yet - since there software is in Beta which no one can use or access.
Are these 'self-promoting' statements not lies to the general public?
The company is only four years old with no salable software application that I am aware of.
Touché
Grub-I can't argue against software that I haven't seen, or no one has seen.
If they have achieved standard emulation for Windows Apps on a iPad, then so be it. I can understand that.
What they need to prove is how useful that is to run Microsoft Excel in its native form on an iPhone.
timorr, you are taking my comments out of context with this snippet of a quote. That is a form of lying - if that is the kind of evidence that you like to toss around.
In my message, I was explaining to another poster why major companies like Netflix won't start using Clipstream G2 yet.
I like DSNY, but I am not all in either. Destiny has shown demos of their software and revealed flaws in their software with some history of improvements over time. They revealed the first Prototype in August 2012, with updates in November 2013 and continuous updates since then.
If we go by the same timeline for SPIHF - and the Corel Office Beta - is the first prototype - then they might have a solution in 2015 or 2016.
Grub - I do not say these are lies. More like, wishful plans that might fall short. When I read website content that is pie-in-the-sky theory without a proven product - it raises more questions than answers.
When I read comments like - 'Okay. Eric, on Sphere 3D, I have not seen any company able to do what Sphere 3D says they can do, number one.'
This statement does not say that Sphere 3D has shown they can do it either. So no company has done it although Sphere 3D says that they plan to do it.
As far as their technology goes - they seem to require the VMWare platform since they are a VMWare partner. So the limitations of that platform will affect their solution.
The June 2012 Graphon/Hopto podcast discusses design differences for touch screen devices that require changes to applications to make them usable. For example, Windows software provides windows controls for displaying multiple applications at the same time by resizing windows. This capability is in-the-way for small devices like the iPad - and worse for the iPhone - since it is impractical to display two apps side-by-side on a 5 inch screen. If standard Apps for Windows are ported onto 5 inch screens without changing the software, the software will be cumbersome or frustrating to users. A second design problem is button sizing when you scale down screen size. Many full-featured Windows apps has relatively small buttons to pack as many features on the screen as possible. When you scale down the buttons, they either become too small to read the icon or you hide buttons through using a scroll bar. The display of software controls and work area becomes an issue for porting Desktop Apps to phones or tablets.
Sphere 3D seems to ignore these issues in their literature while HopTo is addressing them.
IMO - If Sphere 3D does accomplish their emulation technology goals, users won't be entirely happy with the usefulness of the solution unless they have also addressed software changes as well. They seem to be applying software changes to the Corel Office Beta solution, but no one has seem that solution yet.
The Cantech letter seems to be a popularity contest. The judges obviously did not take into account revenues and or sales growth because they have none. The share price growth was a big influence - which is a popularity contest.
'We told our judges we were looking for the most outstanding candidate and asked them to use their own discretion to weigh factors such as revenue and earnings growth, share price appreciation and gains in market capitalization.'
'These are the decisions we left to their discretion as a professional.'
'After learning of the nominees, you can cast your vote at the bottom of this page. In the TSX and TSX Venture Technology awards voting, the readers of Cantech Letter will count as a single judge.'
I will concede that SPIHF management team has put together a presentation package that sounds great - if they can deliver. However, delivery is the question.
I looked at the management team. The Chairman was previously the CEO at Overland Storage, so that is why Overland Storage is involved.
Mr. Biasini, the Sphere 3D President, was the founder of Promotional Depot. So that is why Promotional Depot was involved.
Even Mr. Morelli, the CTO, has very little software development expertise. His background is in communication equipment from Nortel and CTcell, etc.
Read the Sphere 3D announcement -
At the bottom of the press release is:
'VMware is a registered trademark of VMware, Inc. in the United States and other jurisdictions. The use of the word "partner" and/or "partnership" does not imply a legal partnership relationship between VMware and any other company.'
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2013/10/04/578214/10051267/en/Sphere-3D-Announces-VMware-Technology-Alliance-Partner-Program-Elite-Membership.html
Sphere 3D is just a customer of the VMWare platform - much like a Microsoft Development 'partner' is for vendors that sell Microsoft solutions.
Nothing proprietary about this agreement.
Neither.
I have looked at SPIHF as an investment option, but I can't buy shares based on what I see in their tangible assets and believable forecasts.
IMO - there are too many question marks.
Investors undervalue companies and over-value companies. That is what the investing business is all about.
Claiming you are right by using the share price makes no sense to me.
I stated my position - to be fair - and let investors make informed decisions. Based on sales and products and patents, I think SPIHF is bad bet. If you consider other facts like slick videos, technology ambitions, management goals, SPIHF looks pretty good.
In reading the Jacobs reports -
Sphere3D bought their initial software from 'Promotional Depot'? Who is that?
They orchestrated a reverse merge-buyout with a mining company in 2012 to get listed faster on the Toronto exchange.
These could be creative strategies that worked out for them - but they seem to be cutting corners in strange ways to grow into a mega-successful company that you all seem to think is happening.
By-the-way. I was wrong. Sphere 3D has zero patents (not 2) - only patent applications because they haven't been around long enough.
In reading the Frost and Sullivan report, I have to laugh.
I have spent 20 years as a software developer, but I can't follow all of these statements to draw a logical conclusion that it works the way it is described.
While there is a chance that it is over my head, there is also a chance that some of these depictions aren't possible. That is my concern about Sphere3D.
OK - now I have read the Frost and Sullivan report.
You might listen to the June 2012 - Graphon / Hopto audio that discusses software design issues for touch screen devices vs standard computer controls.
The migration of Windows software to touch screens is not as easy as the Frost and Sullivan conclusions describe.
http://www.graphon.com/about-graphon/investors
Yes - I ignored the Frost and Sullivan report.
Frost and sullivan advertises its services to write 'white papers' for companies to get their message across to the public. While I won't slam a report that I haven't read, I consider some of their reports 'dubiously' created for the self-promotion of the paying company.
That may be true for the other white paper as well, but I haven't looked into who wrote it and why, yet.
So you are saying that a company only 3-4 years old with no proven software is better than a 16 year old company which has steady revenues and proven technology and patents?
HPTO's history parallels DSNY's journey - so I am OK with 16 years of history.
I am just concerned that the 'cloud' on this board is fogging some rational judgement. You can thank me after you realize the truth - months or years from now.
Very Funny - I am laughing all the way.
Relying on DD by referring to the company website is like asking a car thief to hold your keys while you jump into a swimming pool.
I have been asking myself - 'What is Glassware 2.0 all about?', but I keep finding holes in the dam of evidence that is presented here.
For Full disclosure, I have been buying HPTO instead of this one.
(1) Glassware 2.0 has two videos on Youtube from 2012. Less than 500 people have viewed those videos in 2 years. In comparison, HPTO has nearly 25,000 views of their new iPad software for Microsoft Office in the last month.
(2) Sphere 3D has 2 patents that support their unique technology, while HPTO has over 50 patents and patent applications that date back over 10 years. HPTO states they have 150 patents, but those patents may be Foreign patents or under other company names.
(3) HPTO has prior business software that has been competing against Microsoft Terminal Server and Citrix solutions for over 10 years, while Sphere 3D has no software. While they have a Beta software that I haven't tried, I can't find anyone who has used the software and expressed their experience with the Corel Office Beta software.
(4) I reviewed the Glassware 2.0 videos online. However, the real display of software functions within the video is very limited - flipping the iPad around does not count as functionality to me. I estimate about 30% of a short video actually shows the Glassware 2.0 software screen. Hmmm. Where are 2013 videos if the software is ready.
I am puzzled how Sphere3D intends to develop innovative solutions that compete in an arena where all the competitors have patents that block their path.
(1) Youtube does not charge for video encoding, while Destiny charges for Clipstream. Google isn't likely to pay costs that they do not incur now. They would want the enterprise software license which isn't available yet.
(2) Clipstream isn't proven in the marketplace yet, in quality, volume, and device variety. Old Computers still running IE 8 can't run the new version of Clipstream, although users running that configuration are disappearing fast.
I have been to conferences like this. Destiny won't likely stand out too much on this event. They do not have anything to deliver yet.
If you want me to be your personal reporter, you can pay me $400 to attend the event for one day. I need the extra $200 for a good lunch. Let me know tonight. You can transfer the funds to my Paypal account.
Will viewing exhibition booth activity really tell me anything? Not really. Which day-and-time do I visit the booth? Clipstream is a minor sponsor / exhibitor - not a featured sponsor.
Destiny is only showing off Clipstream G2 video samples at this show - not the final encoding software. The encoding software will be released in November, per Steve V.
The attendee tickets for the show is over $400 for 2.5 days. The keynote introduction is by Seattle's mayor, who is likely to lose his office on the up coming election. Huh?
I couldn't justify going even though I live in Seattle. None of the event speakers appealed to me enough to invest the time.
Destiny purchased less than 200k shares for less than 100k, for less than 70 cents per share. This was the last buy back program. The prior buy backs were done at cheaper prices.
Those 2012-2013 purchased shares are worth nearly 500k now.
A share buyback program is good for long-term share holders if the shares are bought at ridiculously low share prices.
IMO - the primary goal now is initial customers, not every customer. The quality of the video could be higher now with a higher risk of video play problems. The initial customers will be satisfied with the current quality.
As network bandwidth improves each year bandwidth limit problems may disappear, so Ultra HD videos might be feasible down the road without video play issues.
DSNY won worldwide royalty-free usage rights to two critical Yangaroo patents - not access to the technology.
Destiny was planning to invalidate the Yangaroo patents through the trial. Yangaroo did not want that to happen, so they settled on granting Destiny the usage rights and 600,000 dollars for legal fees and other compensation.
We celebrate Columbus Day - even though Christopher Columbus discovered Cuba, South America, and Mexico. He never set foot in the US territory.
A federal/bank holiday - but Wall street is open for business.
Yes, there may be competitors. While it is good to release a product as soon as possible, it is much worse to release a product that does not satisfy the market fully - such that your competitors see what you have and they quickly respond to develop their product to meet the faults in Destiny's product.
If Destiny takes the time to get the design right - then the competitors won't be able find big gaps in the product design and capitalize on those flaws with marketing ads that slam Clipstream's lack of features.
Declaring a buyback plan of $1 million dollars does not mean that the money will be spent; it only means that the money may be spent.
Only 100k of the money was actually used to buy shares in the mid-60 cent range to retire 156,650 shares.
(1) It was a wise investment since the share price is over $2 now.
(2) Last fall, the stock was being beaten down by short-term traders. If you want long-term investors to buy your stock, Destiny has to do what it can to reward longs and penalize short-term traders.
(3) Some investors might favor spending more money to accelerate the schedule. Yes, that would be ideal if you could plan out the use of that money to make the right investment. As I recall - you were favoring the money to be spent on marketing to seed the roll-out. Any of that money spent on marketing last year would have been wasteful, since they are only still unreleased.
I agree with Steve's choices. He is keeping the costs down by hiring fewer people, but the consequence is a delay in the schedule or poor quality.
There is a famous quote in software development that goes like this:
'In managing any software development project, I have to consider quality, cost, and schedule; but I can only control two of these three metrics. If I commit to quality and cost, then the schedule slips. If I commit to schedule and cost, then the quality drops. If I commit to quality and schedule, then the costs rise.'
When he defined the challenging goal up front, he created a vision that the team needed to meet.
It is nearly impossible to define the ultimate goal for your team and communicate that goal to them, while you make lesser statements to investors to set lower expectations.
Destiny (and Steve) squeezed themselves into a tough software development problem.
(1) They announced how Destiny G2 would solve major problems when the software solution path was not fully decided on - or known. They created an expectation of performance before they could deliver. Running HD videos fast on every device is difficult to do.
(2) They also decided to maintain their profitability during the development process, so they would not hire consultants to accelerate the development process. Therefore, the solutions take longer to develop, since you can't afford to burn out your existing employees either.
When you are in this tough development project, your employees are constantly evaluating how fast features can get done and if quality testing will reveal new problems.
If you promise a firm date in these cases - you either have to have the funds and expert programmers available to take on the extra work, or you let the software release occur with some problems.
Steve is trying to minimize the cost of the development process - both in the development plan, as well as avoiding problems that arise by releasing software that has minor problems. The only solution is to push out the release date.