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.
Excellent find Comatose and very suggestive there is something cooking between S3D and DDN. I mean how much of a coincidence can it be to just pull S3D out of the air as the name of your case study. I think more than a coincidence!
I received my shareholder booklet today for the AGM. After the AGM meeting, the authorized shares will likely be around 50MM because of the new incentive compensation and employee stock purchase plans on the agenda for approval. So that new total will make every $ billion worth $20 once they burn through the authorized amount. No idea how long that may take but each executive is limited to 2,000,000 shares per fiscal year so maybe not too long.
I view this as okay as long as performance follows. Also, these new comp plans may be a way for the executives to position themselves for a buyout should one occur because most of the directors do not have a great number of shares, which is a little surprising. Many people in this chat room have more common shares than 4 of the 7 nominees to be directors and several people here have more than 5 of the 7 nominees. A few of the nominees have some options in their pocket too so there is more involved than just the common shares. But still a little surprising.
Even at 50 MM shares this is a low float stock and those new shares will go into strong hands. But I hope that is it for awhile as a 20% increase in authorized shares on top of the recent added shares for about $5 million in capital is enough for me until I see some revenue. There are plenty of hints the revenue is on the way. The $160 million figure was more than a hint. And if they are doing it because they sense a buyout might be around the corner...well if the price is right we may all be happy.
Thanks, that is an interesting read. We have not had any follow-up as to who ANY partnered with in the so called "Teaming Agreement" for tapping into the government vertical. Makes one wonder if it might be Microsoft. Looking at the link you provided indicates they would be a great partner to have. Also, there was recent mention of GSA approval for ANY so we know there is something going on there. And then there is that bit about virtualizing a mainframe too.
I know it is easy to see Microsoft everywhere we look but I can see where both parties could benefit from such a teaming agreement. Time will tell.
It doesn't matter who asked the question although personally I like the fact that Simon was the one that asked. The answer is the key. Anyone in attendance could have asked it and it would have meant the same thing because only MSFT could answer the question. Shorts do not like the answer that was given so they like to move to something else, in this case who asked the question.
Shorts are good at diverting attention - it is all about the answer and I have not seen anyone refute it or dispute the importance of it.
Great and exciting info today. Love all the posts. Azure is a huge opportunity. Almost too much to absorb right there. The dots are starting to look like elephant footprints - not too hard to connect anymore. Today's presentation was in the heart of tech land. NY, well that is another type of animal isn't it? What leaves bigger footprints than an elephant?
But there is so much more simmering away here it makes my head spin. I keep thinking about the CC. We all know how much the developer community loves open source and that is why Dockers is getting so much attention. I think it was EK who said that Glassware containerizes Dockers. So what is not to like? Glassware containerizes Windows apps for Azure and containerizes the Docker based apps too, which you can then get from a Microsoft app store. I think all the hype over Dockers is going to play into our hands too because Glassware will make the Linux based kernel operate easily within Windows.
Then there is storage. This petabyte thing keeps going around in my head. What did Peter say during the CC - something like our build out potential vertically and horizontally is unmatched by anyone in the industry and it isn't even close. And the amount of data is exploding something like 60% year over year. The storage will require a hybrid model - easily provided by an integrated provider of the same whose storage capacity build out potential is unmatched by anyone - and to re-emphasize - its not even close.
It all fits so well. But the real beauty is the BASF approach that Mac touted early on and has been mentioned again today. The applicability and potential just keeps getting bigger and bigger. While we focus on MSFT, there are all the other verticals. We know things are going on elsewhere but they have not come as much in to focus as MSFT - at least yet. Well, now there is that NovaRad thing and that million student thing, but you know what I mean. Ha!
I have watched a lot of management teams of companies I have invested in over the years. This team executes like no other I have witnessed. I was bothered by some of the "mute" days but that is now "moot". These guys are winners.
Ahagelthrope - I can't say as I was never a party to the negotiations involving an entity that size. I do not think a straight line extrapolation from the size of the facility I was at to what you are talking about is possible. Big organizations with high volume get a better deal per image and the mix of patients seen in an acute setting with multiple ICUs, a Level 1 Emergency Department etc. is very different from a group practice based in the community. Also, I was at a facility with a medical school where a common assumption is that studies may be over ordered by residents learning their craft. Also, research can play a role in the negotiations too, so an academic institution has a different set of negotiating tools than a group practice.
JB - thank you for including the post. I did not consider the post anything special as it was just an aspect of a job I was involved with for what seemed an eternity. Just goes to show that what is in one person's head may have some value to others even when you aren't thinking that way.
University owned, 600 licensed beds , usual census 400+, major level 1 trauma center.
I sincerely doubt you are correct. This does not likely need to be sold as it is already sold. I was administratively responsible for many of these types of agreements in multiple hospital departments over a 35 year admin healthcare career. My longest association with any one department was with Radiology (my last 22 years) and its complex imaging agreements. The agreements we fashioned with imaging companies always included refresh clauses for software to the latest and greatest. At least one software refresh was in every agreement I was involved with. Keeps the vendor from springing new software on you soon after purchase. The cost was included in the original agreement so no selling to the hospital or clinic is needed. In other words, the transaction for the software will likely be between Novorad and Sphere and already has been determined. Novorad will pay Sphere as the refreshes occur.
I read this as a big endorsement of Glassware, with the multi-device solution physicians demand in this day and age. Also, in our agreements there were accession charges - for each and every image accessed through the system, so it is quite likely structured in this way which provides recurring revenue.
In the last agreement I was a party to there were also charges for storage - a flat fee for the first 2 million images and then decreasing cost/scan tiers beyond that. The word image is key - in CT and MRI scans there can be many images for one patient. For instance a routine brain scan (nothing special) can be about 60 images. And you keep them all as, once taken, there are legal ramifications and restrictions in getting rid of any as you might do with your digital camera.
Storage will be interesting as to how it plays out. The trend favors the integrated solution Sphere offers but it may not be built in to a refresh like software commonly is. My last agreement handled this as a separate negotiated issue in the contract. Still, the integrated solution will be attractive and, in my experience, facilities will likely want it. It was alluded to in the CC. Even if a facility does not start with the whole package they may well end up there as the inexorable need for good storage solutions, preferably fully integrated, becomes pressing.
It is a huge oversight, and actually naive to not see the import of this announcement. I worked in a large hospital but our bill for these services when I left 3 years ago was about $3.5 million a year. The refresh alone will be huge as I can't imagine the 400 facilities left refresh out of their agreements with Novorad. Just doesn't happen. The tab to refresh 400 facilities is going to provide substantial cash upfront and on an on-going basis.
Also, Novorad benefits with the refresh as they gain new healthcare facilities with state of the art technology their competitors cannot offer. They will likely use their early refresh sites as demo sites. This will open the door for Sphere to obtain new Novorad sites. Novorad's competitors will take notice and may come knocking on Sphere's door too.
No doubt-the biggest announcement by Sphere yet and Peter noted that in the CC. He said to his knowledge he had never seen a contract of this scope in the virtualization space or something to that effect. Just huge.
Do not know the specifics of the size of the sales force but the company is very active in that area. A few days ago I received my annual report from the company and it is clear they are ramped up on monetization of product through aggressive sales force expansion. From the report:
"Sales and marketing expenses were $5.2 million and 0.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The significant increase in expense was the result of the Company expanding its sales, marketing and support staff throughout 2014."
Also, there is a table in the report I found quite interesting as a way of looking at the outlays the company is making. It shows major expense categories as a % of net revenue:
Net revenue: 100%
Cost of revenue: 60.4%
Gross profit: 39.6%
Sales and Marketing: 38.3%
Research and Development: 4.9%
General and Administrative: 85.9%
The expense categories exceed 100% so we operate at a loss. But Sales and Marketing expense in 2014 was 38.3% of net revenue and I suppose the amount spent is going up in 2015. Ideally, the amount spent on the sales force would not necessarily translate to an increase in the 38.3% of net revenue we see now as going forward we all hope revenue growth outstrips the growth in expense associated with sales. We shall see somewhere down the road.
Also, the expense for R&D in 2014 was low as a % of revenue which indicates the time for messing around in the lab has largely come to an end (although we all want to see the glassware on a chip).
Going forward I want to keep an eye on these percentages as I see them as an easy way to translate the success the company is having into the activity required to achieve that success. The mix should change as the company matures. And at some point, hopefully soon, the expense categories will not exceed or even add up to 100% of revenue. At that point the company will be making money and so will we.
Just, Of course you should do what you are most comfortable with. But I own the other stock too and here is something to remember, especially after the announcement made today about the other stock. It has an ever increasing float that may be justified in time. But the fully diluted share count, based on today's announcement, is quite likely going to be at least 5 times the share count of ANY. Assuming an announcement of equal import to the future of both companies would theoretically move the price of ANY 5 times the amount it would move the other stock. So each to his own but I have been doing the exact opposite, that is, adding here, not there.
One other thing, the speed of advancement in the other stock is like trying to watch a glacier move, a ponderous, inexorable grind. Still, I do like it just not enough to add to my position there.
Might be a good time to review ANY limit sell orders. I know a while back several of us placed them in an effort to counter some of the shorting. Vanguard allowed me to place some at $35 but I read of several on the board that were far lower - I think I recall $15 as one of the cited amounts.
I do not want to see UBOL shares taken away if things get crazy. And as wild as this ride has been, it seems that crazy is our middle name. At this point $15 seems crazy but sometimes crazy happens. A few words from MSFT and who knows what might happen.
Bought several times this week. Unfortunately, not enough to be considered one of Mac's whales. But I do see myself as a Bluefin Tuna at this point. They can get almost to 1000 pounds so hopefully I caused at least a little irritation to some who are on the other side of the bet. Also, they are known to run in schools so might be a few others hanging around with me at these prices.
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608029926368480193&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0
Thanks Pepsi. The microvisor approach sounds like a big step forward so another key area for Sphere to make inroads. I too like the forward thinking of the Sphere team and the fact they talk of such things as mentioned in the Madden interview is indicative of why we are ahead of the pack with what we have now. That type of thinking is what drives innovation, not the thought that such ideas are laughable. Those who laugh at the innovators are usually too conventional and rigid in their thinking to move anything forward. Time will tell.
I keep thinking about one other thing - the strategy sessions the Sphere team must have. These guys know their stuff and I would love to sit in on one of the sessions as they plot their moves. To my eye their record reads like a textbook on how to do things right. Just fascinating to watch it unfold.
Thanks Pete. Me too. I found the audio presentation so much more meaningful now. It seems one of the things that makes Morelli so special is his background with both phones and computers. It seems to be paying off in unexpected ways which no one else has been able to duplicate. I would like to go to a shareholder meeting sometime and meet him.
You have more tech expertise than me but I do find your second paragraph somewhat contradictory. It seems to suggest the specialized function inherent in a GPU versus that of a standard CPU but then goes on to say that if you don't have a GPU that the CPU will do the graphics. So what makes the GPU so special? Is it just efficiency of performing the function versus the CPU doing it or something more fundamental.
Also, I am out of my league when discussing what a computer engineer may find amusing. I will say though that Morelli has done something that no one else has been able to duplicate - at least that I know of. So it will be interesting to see what else he has up his sleeve.
I appreciate your comments.
Only one statement in all the time I have owned this stock made me double my position as soon as I heard it and was able to do so. It revolved around the issue at stake in your post. While I am not a techie, I doubled my position (since have added many other times) on the premise that, in the near future, hardware will be sort of like a transformer toy, changed into something else by the software. If I am right in interpreting what Peter Bookman said, especially regarding the concept of "Software Defined Everything" then in the near future, GW may have a lot to do with the GPU and will do so without adding GPU hardware. Instead, needed functions could be software programs sitting in containers and utilized on an as needed basis.
Listen to the interview between Bookman and Brian Madden. The key part of the conversation starts around the 54 minute mark. The comment that sent me off buying shares was the idea that GW could allow a sound card to become a GPU. In other words hardware, whether a GPU or a sound card, is "just a bunch of transistors" and can be reassigned function. The concept is mind boggling to me as it would seem to disrupt hardware manufacturers as we enter a brave new world of "Software Defined Everything." No more sound cards or video cards and probably other types of specialized hardware too. Just a chip which becomes what the software tells it to be ("be a sound card, now be a video card") when it is needed with GW acting as a one man band capable of providing an entire symphony of functions. Simplicity and efficiency.
Maybe I have misunderstood what was said in the interview. As I said, not a techie. But if I did understand it, the tweet referencing support of GPU function could take on a rather stunning (I think) significance beyond what has been discussed on the board. Not sure if Sphere is ready for that step yet but clearly they are thinking about it and have been for some time.
http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/bglive/archive/2014/06/10/brianmadden-com-podcast-with-sphere3d-at-9-30pst-today-what-do-they-do-join-us-live.aspx
I would be interested in what others think. If I am wrong it is okay as I am still happy that I doubled my position back then. But revisiting the issue and listening to the discussion in that interview has made me want to add more shares, although I already added about 5% to my position in the past week.
One last thing - in re-listening to that section of the interview it is so apparent that Morelli is a genius, a real visionary. It is clear that Brian Madden had never thought of reassigned hardware function and noted it was "cool". Yeah, it is.
I agree with some of the sentiments posted earlier today regarding reading too much into some of the MSFT generated announcements and their immediate applicability to Sphere. I also think Michael Keen does paint with a broad brush and cites trends in the industry that are not necessarily linked directly to anything Sphere is doing at the present time. That is not to say that such linkages may not be fruitful for Sphere in the future.
In other instances, I think the dots are easier to connect. Such was the case with Liquid Ware Labs and the city of Tempe AZ I posted a few weeks back. Now another case study has appeared on the LWL site for a UK company known as The Banks Group. The City of Tempe was a Jan 2015 case study and The Banks Group is a Feb 2015 case study, so even more recent. The use of Profile Unity by The Banks Group for Windows migration has the feel of Glassware all over it. You will recall Profile Unity was the same product LWL used for the Tempe project.
This is not the scope of a MSFT Azure arrangement. Still it is impressive because LWL is doing the selling, not Sphere. LWL benefits because Profile Unity can do the job whereas sans Glassware it likely would not be able to get the customer. A pretty good deal for both companies.
How much of this is going on? A good question but it is obvious LWL is only making an occasional customer a case study so it plausible other LWL Profile Unity (and Glassware) customers exist in their book from the time the two companies teamed up. To say nothing of the other alliances and partnerships with other companies that Sphere has forged where we have no indication as of yet as to what is occurring.
Here is the link on The Banks Group case study and another link on The Banks Group (not to be confused with another company with the same name in Austin TX). The UK company is confirmed as the wording of the case study description of The Banks Group UK matches word for word the description on the company's website.
http://www.liquidwarelabs.com/content/pdf/customers/Liquidware-Labs-The-Banks-Group.pdf
http://www.banksgroup.co.uk/
Keep up the good work LWL! Each of their sales incorporating Glassware has the potential to blossom in many directions as satisfied customers spread the word. Soon a trickle becomes a flood that washes away the existing paradigm.
I want to thank Pete for his post #18528 and a follow-up post from JFM #18553.I was busy with visitors for a week and had no time to do anything about a Roth until today. In re-reading the posts and looking at the situation with a Roth it became very clear that this is an absolute must do situation. So I went ahead today and converted what I felt I could pay in taxes next year.
Then I realized what was really being said went further than what I thought. So I had more conversations with my account custodians to confirm the thesis. On Monday I will be converting 3 other IRA accounts to Roth IRAs - the 3 accounts I cannot afford to pay taxes on next year.
Why would I do that? In case it is not clear why I would convert the accounts when I cannot afford the taxes, re-read Pete's and JFM's posts. Call it insurance in case the price rises or falls. If it rises I pay the taxes (as Pete noted) from hopefully massive gains and do so on a low SP basis linked to the date of conversion. If the SP falls (as JFM noted) you recharacterize back to a regular IRA and are protected from being taxed on an asset that has now lost value. If the SP stays about the same, I recharacterize it back to a regular IRA too as I cannot afford to pay the taxes on all the accounts in one year. So in a very real sense you are protected no matter what happens.
It will be very important not to miss the recharacterization deadline should that be necessary, which, for me will be April 15, 2016 or in October 2016 if I file an extension. After that I am out of luck as far as recharacterization goes.
One point - if you want to use Roth funds to pay taxes on a big gain you must (with a few oddball exceptions)have had a ROTH IRA (any Roth IRA, it does not have to be the one just opened) for 5 years and be 59 1/2 years old. Otherwise, you are likely taking an unqualified distribution and will pay a penalty. In my case I have an old Roth that is about 20 years old and am older than 59 1/2 but that will not be the case with everyone.
I advise you check with a tax advisor as to your own situation and not just rely on posters on this board. But for my situation Pete and JFM are right - you need to look into this, and that is regardless of where the share price may end up when the taxes come due. I had never thought about using the Roth as an insurance policy regardless of the outcome on SP and had squirmed with the amount of taxes that would be due when added to my other sources of income. But this is just too good to pass up. FWIW!
I think most agree the Liquidware Labs sale to the City of Tempe, AZ was a Glassware-based solution given the way the case study reads on the LW Labs site. A careful read of the case study reveals that LW labs did not approach Tempe with a prospective solution. Tempe was referred to LW Labs by IT Partners, with whom Tempe had a consulting contract. This is important for a couple of reasons as I see it.
First, another large company, a consultant to many entities, is offering up a solution that is Glassware-based. The second is that IT Partners is an expert purveyor of the goods of several major players: HP, VM Ware, Cisco, Microsoft etc.(see link to IT Partners web site). In the case of Tempe, a solution was needed to solve a problem with VM Ware.
The beauty of this thing is that apparently no one from Sphere was involved. IT Partners told Tempe this was the way to fix the problem that VM Ware (with whom IT Parners is a Premier partner) could not address.
The roots of Sphere are spreading, the green has sprouted and Sphere is stretching toward the Sun.
http://goitpartners.com/technologies
Struftpete, Thanks and no I had not seen the article but it was a good read. These large companies seem to be everywhere and trying to out think each other. The bottom line comes round when they place their bets and see whether the market responds. I do like the fact that Microsoft and other behemoths are increasingly looking outward toward small innovative companies. I have no doubt Sphere is on their radars and some day one of them will come to the conclusion that it is too good of a strategic fit and come calling.
They have been quiet but you can connect the dots...
http://sphere3d.com/v3-systems-partners-with-liquidware-labs-to-offer-flexible-application-delivery-on-high-performing-windows-virtual-desktops-2/
I confess I had sort of forgotten about this partnership. But after reviewing that it doesn't take much connecting of the dots to figure out who is behind the two latest Profile Unity/FlexApp stories highlighted on the Liquidware Labs site. Besides Buffalo schools, this one about the City of Tempe AZ is very instructive as it points out how VM Ware's ThinApp couldn't virtualize apps that FlexApp could. It reads like a Glassware testimonial.
http://www.liquidwarelabs.com/content/pdf/customers/Liquidware-Labs-City-of-Tempe.pdf
All of the other case studies are older but it does make one wonder if some of those might be re-visited with the latest technology upgrades now possible.
It is intriguing to speculate about the interactions between the large players in this space and how Sphere 3D might fit into some of those interactions. Here is an article Michael Keen posted on Twitter that opines that Microsoft is trying to turn Google and others into "dumb pipes" with an eye toward being an overlord in the cloud.
A key quote:
"Microsoft may be moving beyond simply offering its own services on rival platforms like iOS and Android. What apps such as Acompli and Sunrise can do is let the company reach across cloud services with its own intelligence, essentially becoming the mega-service that sits on top."
While sitting there on top of everything, Microsoft wants to mine data and offer new services based on what they can get out of the dumb pipes. These companies are something else!
Seems there is a role here for Sphere with a cloud protocol that can access all the dumb pipes while avoiding the expensive rewrites Microsoft is now doing with some of their existing programs for the different operating systems as mentioned in the article. Also makes me think of that Microsoft agreement in a new way, that is, from the viewpoint of Microsoft instead of Sphere.
I always get confused about the licensing implications of such turf wars. Also, it is interesting to read the comments following the article as some feel this strategy is a fail from the start. And these comments intertwine security and other issues that are hard to understand as to their implications if this really the strategy Microsoft wishes to pursue. But as I see it without theses confounding factors, that is, in a world based on ubiquitous access and efficiency, Sphere would be a winner with the approach laid out in this article.
http://www.fastcompany.com/3042112/app-economy/microsofts-new-app-strategy-turning-google-into-a-dumb-pipe
True Silverline. Manipulation. I hope ANY can steer clear with some solid news. I own another stock where this was posted the other day. There ought to be consequences but.... At any rate it will be interesting to see the other 14 chapters. An alarming read for sure.
https://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-1-of-15/
Slc - Thanks for the backstory. I was startled by the following statement and wonder if the wording was accurate or if it was a bit loose.
"PolyMedix says it identified its lead drug candidate in less than 18 months for less than $2 million. The company believes it can have its first antibiotic drug on the market in five to six years, for about $100 million. It has created 12 classes of antibiotics and selected several of them as candidates for human trials, Mr. Landekic said. "We've shown that they kill more than 80 different strains of bacteria. Actually, we haven't found any strain of bacteria that we haven't been able to kill with these compounds," Mr. Landekic said. The compounds have been effective on the biowarfare pathogens black plague, tularemia and 12 strains of anthrax, he said."
The implication of CTIX possessing 12 classes of antibiotics is, to put it simply, mind boggling as there have only been 2 new classes of antibiotics developed since 1962. Here is a list of antibiotic classes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_antibiotics
As a side note: Couldn't help but notice someone added Teixobactin at the end as an antibiotic candidate. I wish I knew how to add Brilacidin in that section as a new class candidate far ahead of Teixobactin. Who knows, maybe someone on the board knows how to edit Wikipedia.
Anyway, back to the quote - I think it is more likely the reference is to twelve new molecules and I am hesitant to believe each represents a new class. I do not know this for sure as the article says classes but it is a newspaper article, albeit the WSJ, which, while a good paper, lacks the rigor of an academic journal article. Also, when the polyheist occurred, there was mention of a discrete number of molecules (I seem to recall 18 or something like that) but this is the first I have seen reference to 12 classes.
All of which raises the question as to whether subsequent work eliminated many of them or, alternatively, are they hiding down there in the patents etc. and have the potential to surface as future viable drug candidates and additional classes with analogues. If they are there - well, I don't know quite what to say.
Well, it is after 4PM on the 27th when the updated short interest for ANY was to be shown. This link shows a number that is not consistent with some of the thoughts expressed about the amount of short interest, which, as I understood it, was to have supposedly included the reconciled Canadian shorts too.
Am I missing something? Has a great amount already been covered? If this is the real total I doubt there will be a squeeze.
http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/any/short-interest
Thanks JB. I assumed they were already counted in the outstanding too and just periodically made available. To whom is the question. If it is to the founders that would be great. I just didn't want to see another 1.3 million available to the shorts at the end of the month.
Absolutely love the delist news. Shows the resolve of management to maximize value. Another twist - in the quarterly report there was reference a large tranche of escrow shares the TSX-v was going to put in play in late December. About 1.3 million shares as I recall for this tranche but there were more to be released in the future as well. Seemed like a good opportunity for shorts to cover. If management is on the ball the delist will happen before any escrowed shares are released. I imagine the escrowed shares would be returned to the company after delist. Anybody have any insight on this?
Here is what an expert on Brilacidin's propensity to cause renal toxicity had to say about it:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=brilacidin+renal+toxicity&src=IE-TopResult&FORM=IETR02&conversationid=
Click on the 2nd link from the top which took me straight to the Medscape article with no need to sign in. The whole article is a good re-read but the salient point is this:
"There was no evidence of liver or kidney toxicity, no deaths, and no prolongation in the QTc interval with brilacidin, Dr. Jorgensen said."
You can get more info on the QTc interval from this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QT_interval
I think that sums it up pretty well = Safe.
I also have wondered about the question for which Z can't seem to get an answer. It seems Overland is first mover with this Bit Torrent technology but it does not appear to be proprietary, i.e., other companies could cut the same deal with Bit Torrent.
The advantage might simply be that there are few companies that are end to end in this space - desktop to storage. Also, much profit comes to competitors for the storage provided under the existing model so many customers would welcome the speed, enhanced security and lower cost of the Overland/Bit Torrent approach.
But, given these advantages, how many providers there will be of this paradigm shift? Just Sphere? Seems unlikely. Other players will likely step in should we see success with customers moving in this direction unless someone can explain something unique about the capabilities of our products versus competitors. Or that we have a contractual agreement with Bit Torrent precluding others from securing the same technology. And as a follow on to Z's inquiry, where is the revenue? Is it solely hardware based since the revenue from a private cloud would not seem to entail transaction costs. A week or so ago someone asked that question too and I do not recall an answer.
I agree the speed, cost and private cloud aspects are compelling. In solving so many problems a good case can be made that it is the future, so to speak. And it seems an excellent way to break the status quo and gain a foothold with customers, particularly as a first mover. But I for one would like an answer to the big question:
ARE WE ALONE?
And if not... WHEN WILL THE ALIENS ARRIVE?
SE88 - I want MUTE to be DLST. Tired of MUTE.
Lnp, I think your numbers are correct. I do not, however, think that is all there is to payments that may came from BAT. There is another part of the contract laid out in section 3.09 that describes payments each company makes to the other based on sales. It is part of the non-exclusive term of the contract, which I believe overlaps the 2nd and 3rd commercial terms. During that time, each company pays 50% of their profit from sales to the other. Good chance BAT sales will significantly exceed XXII given their global reach.
I think the payments you refer to are payment just related to the genetic technology, not sales. I would attach the wording from section 3.09 but I have a hike to lead. Will catch up tonight.
Derek, I have avoided engaging you. But since you keep asking people on this board why they do not answer your questions, I have one for you. You, on more than one occasion, have stated the Chromebook deal was not a Glassware deal, that in fact it was a V3 deal. Can you provide us any substantive evidence of that? Your opinion is not good enough. On what are you basing that statement?
SE 88, Okay, it is a big deal, especially now with resistance. I was hard on Dr. J. But it is hard to dismiss so many other great accomplishments with his Mohammed Aliesque statement that B will be the greatest in past 75 years etc. It just sort of hit a nerve with the brashness of it all. Well, on second thought Ali was brash but he did back it up didn't he.
My point: hard to pick one. As an example, I read a book on blood banking. So many died in WWII because there was no cellular components in the transfusions. The thought at the time was volume replacement was the key. Really did not see effective blood banking until late 1940's. One example of so many essential and great advancements. CT in the 1970's. MRI machines, cancer treatment, immunization programs (I still remember lining up to get my polio vaccine at the local high school when they first became available), genetics even computers. Hard to dismiss any of them. But you know that.
Ophthalmologist you say. I have some old roots in that field, not as an MD - technical stuff, mainly corneal transplantation. Eleven years working with academic ophthalmologists, training corneal fellows on eye banking, enucs, slit lamp endothelial cell density evals for viability , corneal preservation etc. Know a lot of people in the corneal and external disease area but I left it many years ago but not before dabbling in non-ophthalmic aspects of transplantation. Moved on into hosp. admin as transplantation was a job for young people (terrible hours in the transplant field).
So back to Dr.J: I hear it now: I coulda been somebody. I coulda been a contender.
I've been keeping a low profile but this is just too much. C'mon Dr. Jerry! Really?
"Brilacidin has the possibility of being the most significant medical breakthrough since the discovery of penicillin 75 years ago!!!"
So, greater than the discovery of the double helix or for that matter cracking the human genome? Personally I loved the invention of birth control pills when I was a teenager or who knows what might have happened! But that is just me.
Struft, My head is spinning too. I keep thinking about two photos. Bare metal and storage containers. This may help:
http://www.informationweek.com/cloud/infrastructure-as-a-service/rackspace-touts-containers-on-bare-metal-servers/d/d-id/1278729?itc=edit_in_body_cross
Storage containers on bare metal? Will Kate ever again need to concern herself with photos of a different ilk than the two I am thinking about but still of a bare variety? Maybe not. Probably have to go to the board of the other pick and consult with Penny Buster to know for sure.
I'm ready for that. The bio is keeping me entertained in the meantime. But yes, it would be nice.
Have you been thinking about those two pictures? I have a theory.
You might want to reconsider. Cyanide is kind of nasty stuff.
http://chemistry.about.com/b/2007/09/12/yes-apple-seeds-and-cherry-pits-are-poisonous.htm
JFM, You are right and the company has been even more forthright as the 10-Q was pretty specific. From the 10Q:
"Sales and marketing costs
Sales and marketing costs were $34,160 for the six months ended June 30, 2014, as compared to $0 for the six months ended June 30, 2013. Sales and marketing expenses incurred during the six months ended June 30, 2014 were primarily related to costs associated with participation in a tobacco industry trade show and materials used for marketing on trips to Europe and China."
Marketing tobacco products in China can only be to one entity. In this case we do not need dots as we have a smoking gun.
You are dead on Pepsi. A great day for arbitrage. I liquidated over 12,000 OVRL shares and converted the proceeds to ANY shares. 175 of the ANY shares were free. Then the window closed...
Emily - That is an interesting article but it seems a little misleading to me. A casual reader is likely to think XXII is a e-cig company. Also, picking the high from an uplist is technically a true reflection of the size of the XXII drop but it is hardly unexpected there would be a drop given the euphoria accompanying an uplist announcement. Thanks for the post.