Everything I say is my own opinion. Don't listen to me.
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 feel pretty confident that WiMax WILL have its time in the spotlight, and that MediaG3 has a shot at sharing some of that spotlight, but, I am fairly confident that LTE will dominate the industry and suffocate WiMax EVENTUALLY, except in areas where LTE towers cannot be built, similarly to how some areas still don't have fiber optic cables for faster internet speeds, not related, just an example.
What I PERSONALLY am waiting for is a buyout, which is best case scenario, OR, MediaG3 sees a boost in pps between now and 2012 due to people adopting WiMax while they wait for LTE. Either way, I think all shareholders will see profit, its just a matter of how much.
From what I gather, the two companies who are leading the WiMax industry at the moment are Clearwire and Alvarion, either of these two companies could recognize MediaG3 as a useful asset. Lets say, worst case scenario, MDGC's patents are bogus, they could still be an acquisition target due to their assets, like the towers they have constructed or their current customer base.
Despite what people may think, I have hope for MDGC, which is why I have bought 50k shares a day for the past 4 days. I will admit, I am not as optimistic as some, but MDGC will make us all some money either way.
lol! you better stop posting things that don't say WiMax is the best or you will be labeled a basher like I have been.
I do appreciate your post though, I am always interested in the good and the bad of a stock/industry I have taken a deep interest in.
And to the rest of you doing DD and not JUST posting the great things you find, feel free to PM the info you find, I am always interested.
I sure do hope you are right, I am just trying not to get my hopes up, there is still some room for MDGC to flop. If MediaG3 really plans to go after the big boys for copyright infringment there is still the possibility that they lose. You must not forget, a company like google pays close to 1 BILLION dollars just to have lawyers on retainer, you dont pay that kind of $ to lawyers who lose.
I feel we should also keep in mind that WiMax and LTE are in somewhat of a competition for the #1 spot. WiMax rolls out faster, BUT, the big boys (Verizon, AT&T...) will have LTE up and running in 2011/2012 and the industry, according to what I read, is almost at the point where people need to chose a side. Either you hold out for the technology that will be adopted by the companies with the largest marketshare OR you go with the technology thats currently available but MAY not be as widely accepted.
The same thing happened with blueRay and HD, both were tied for a while but once the big boys announced they were going to adopt blueray, HD DVD's dissapeared overnight.
Hopefully nobody thinks this is me bashing or whatever, I am merely voicing my opinion that although I HOPE MDGC becomes a wireless icon in the industry, there is still a chance that they may not become all that we hope they will be become.
End of 1Q, MM's need to make sure they look good on paper for tax/investor purposes.
When 2nd Q starts, people are usually, MM's included, willing to make riskier investments because they know they have a few months to recover if a stock heads for the worst, which may help MDGC.
Personally, I would like to see MDGC hit .014 without news.
Congrats guys, I dont have any CDIV but I do like to see Monk's squad doing well. I also secretly want you all to dump your profits into EIGH, ;p
Question
If MDGC holds patents to the 24 mhz frequency and verizon/AT&T are working with 700 mhz would I be wrong in assuming that these are two different types of technology and that no patent infringment has occured?
Some wireless Industry info
If you guys have seen this before, my bad
Mobile infrastructure companies should be busy until mid-2012
Mar. 14, 2010
According to attendees at the Colorado Wireless Association Educational and Social Event on March 11, LTE (long term evolution) and new Wi-MAX networks, as well as an increased focus on distributed antenna systems should keep mobile infrastucture equipment manufacturers, site acquisition companies and other firms engaged in the tower-siting industry fairly busy until at least mid-2012.
At the same time, new estimates from research firm Visant Strategies support those expectations as well.
When compared to other states, Colorado is fairly progressive in wireless regulation, noted Mark Williams, an attorney focused on telecom and wireless initiatives. The state passed a wide-ranging telecommunications act more than 15 years ago, the year before the federal law was enacted.
But because Colorado has term limits, new legislators need to be educated regularly about tower-siting, nevertheless.
And despite zoning regulations and other issues, mobile networks will continue to be built and optimized to be able to handle the increasing wireless traffic from mobile users who have shown no signs of slowing down their expectations.
Even as conference members acknowledged that wireless carriers can no longer site large towers in crowded urban locations, increased traffic on networks (which is only going to continue to explode) is going to force mobile service carriers to directly address capacity issues.
As a direct result of all of this, wireless carriers are beginning to embrace DAS solutions and including them in their network planning, said Greg Watson, regional sales manager, Wireless Network Solutions at ADC Telecommunications.
A multi-tenant DAS network was just installed in the exclusive Cherry Hills area in Denver because residents demanded better mobile coverage but didn’t want their views obstructed, said Rick Sullivan, AT&T real estate and construction manager for the Rocky Mountains.
Sullivan reminded conference attendees that the sins of one company in the tower-siting business quickly become “the sins of many,” as planning authorities tend to punish everyone trying to site a facility if one company falls short on delivering what was promised to the municipality.
Sullivan also noted that this same mentality is now impacting many other local authorities on U.S. soil simply because of the FCC’s stiff ruling that all municipalities need to play by the same set of rules because a smaller set of government agencies have drawn out siting decisions.
And it gets worse.
According to a new study done by research firm Visant Strategies, both base station and backhaul buildouts will jump in the next five years.
According to Larry Swasey, co-founder of Visant "there are now between two and three base stations per site on average with sites growing from a good number over 100,000 to over 150,000 by year-end 2015, and we see the number of sites in need of a backhaul capacity of 155 Mbps and greater growing over seven-fold by year-end 2015."
Visant also estimates that Verizon Wireless has the most base stations (approximately 61,500) while AT&T Mobility and Sprint Nextel count about 52,120 base stations, and T-Mobile USA at about 42,500.
“AT&T and Verizon will be able to gain nationwide LTE coverage with substantial capacity by deploying between 15,000 and 25,000 LTE base stations. They'll need substantially fewer base stations for coverage compared to existing cellular and especially 1.9 GHz systems because they are deploying on the 700 MHz band and because the first iteration of LTE will include 2x2 MIMO,” Swasey said.
However, Clearwire will need from one-and-one-half to three times the number of mobile WiMAX base stations simply because it operates at a higher frequency, Swasey noted.
Most of the time, I feel the same way, that its not MM but just someone unloading, BUT, someone was dumping shares at like 20% BELOW the current bid, thats either the biggest idiot investor alive, OR, its MM's bid wacking with small orders to drive this down and make people think others are selling. I cant say with 100% certainty which one it is.
And to Bullish, Nobody is heckling, if anything we are doing the exact opposite. There is obvious strength behind this stock, we are merely pointing out that in its CURRENT state MDGC is moving on rumors and WHAT I CONSIDER skimpy PR's (no REAL substance, just enough to keep people interested). We would like to see some solid news, thats not heckling, thats just investors who have realistic expectations of the companies they chose to invest in =D
I picked up 60k shares today, I have no interest in holding this stock back, I would love nothing more than to see it selling at $5.00 a share tomorrow
Today is a joke and tomorrow will be the same. This is just some last minute number manipulation due to the 1Q ending this week. Thursday we should see some realistic movement.
I could be wrong here, but I don't think those additional shares being obsorbed is the real issue. This float is not locked down yet...
Flippers buy on rumors and sell on news, wait untill the PR, you will notice quite a few sell orders I think. Right now they are just waiting
hehe, I picked up a few more during todays dip
10:11:22
BOUGHT 60000s @ $0.009 Total: $549.70
Lol,if the float was gone it would still not stop MM's from selling you air shares. MM's dont care about the float, they just want to fill orders so that they dont lose customers. When its time to cover they will shake and see if nervous investors let some shares go.
I do agree with what you are saying, my only point was that I dont feel that flippers taking .0003 profit is a good indication of the future of this company.
I normally stay away from stocks that depend on PR's so heavily, but, MDGC seems to have a shot in the tech industry so I made an exception. I honestly dont even want a PR every week, they only result in short term runs. I would like the company to say with 100% certainty who its execs are, what positions they hold and what companies they are going after for pattent infringment, and for what ammount. Personally, I dont care what lawyers you hire or what brand name you are deciding to use, tell me what you are doing that will directly result in shareholders seeing a SUSTAINABLE rise in pps.
There is one thing that I feel you do not account for. Many flippers and shorts do not know/ or care about a companies fundamentals. They study charts and look at the numbers, when the chart indicates a run is coming, they buy, when resistance levels are reached, they sell. How many patents a company has are about as useful as a screen door on a submarine to a chartist or flipper
Does anyone think that the end of the 1st quarter may be why EIGH has been held down? Maybe MM's want to look good on paper going into the 2nd quarter and need to cover at these prices before they can allow for another run.
ok, I posted it ;p
This is from THE WSJ, not me
Some information is usually better than none, but investors who track a new set of short-selling data would be well-advised to proceed with care.
U.S. stock exchanges on Aug. 3 started to track and publish "short volume" statistics -- a measurement of daily short sales of stock -- as part of a Securities and Exchange Commission initiative to curb abusive short sales. Potentially abusive sales, which include "naked shorting," have been blamed for turmoil in the stock market and even the 2008 demise of Bear Stearns Cos. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
The problem with the new information is that some experts think the data, when used alone, could be misleading. That is largely because the numbers don't show new short positions or the reasons why the sellers made their moves. In other words, not all short sellers are betting against a stock.
Unlike short-interest data, which are distributed twice a month and show the percentage of shares that have been sold short and not repurchased, short volume simply tracks the number of shares that are sold short over the course of a day.
On Sept. 10, for example, 391,032 shares of Google Inc. were sold short on the Nasdaq Stock Market, out of 880,911 shares of Google traded that day.
Investors often sell stock short -- or sell stock they don't already own -- in hopes the stock price will fall, allowing them to buy it back for a cheaper price. But the short-volume data in Google, and other stocks, don't disclose whether the short sales establish new positions, the red flags that typically signal bearish expectations for a stock.
For example, if a trader sells 100 shares short at 2 p.m. and then buys them all back an hour later, the short volume will still record 100 shares sold short. It won't account for the trader covering his short position.
"One of the concerns in the discussions so far involves the ability [of the data] to send false signals," said Frank Hathaway, chief economist for Nasdaq OMX Group Inc. "Investors would need to learn over time whether the pickup in short selling was normal or whether it was significant."
Market makers, for example, routinely sell stock short as they attempt to meet customer orders. Money managers also sell stock to hedge positions they take in other stocks or to take advantage of arbitrage situations. In neither of those cases are they making a directional bet on the price, so it isn't a bearish indicator.
To be sure, some experts think the data could be useful in some way but are wondering how investors will use the information when making trading decisions. There is some evidence that short-volume statistics can be a useful indicator. A 2008 study found that stocks heavily shorted tended to underperform those lightly shorted by an average of 1.2% over the course of 20 trading days.
"It's interesting that, despite all the weakness in the data, there is a very strong uniformity and very strong predictability," said Charles Jones, a professor of finance and economics at Columbia University and one of the authors of the study.
But Prof. Jones warned that this may not last. Traders using algorithmic and high-frequency strategies are big short sellers, weaving in and out of stocks on a short-term basis with no long-term view on the stock. "If that's the case, then there could be a lot more noise in this data than there used to be," he said.
Brokerage firms, meanwhile, say they prefer to provide customers with as much data as possible, even if it doesn't give clear signals on investment decisions.
"Is this going to be the magic sauce? I don't think so," said Tom Sosnoff, a senior vice president of TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. "But could this be another indicator we look at? Yes. It's 100 times better to have information out there than to regulate it."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125311330171216097.html
Some information is usually better than none, but investors who track a new set of short-selling data would be well-advised to proceed with care.
U.S. stock exchanges on Aug. 3 started to track and publish "short volume" statistics -- a measurement of daily short sales of stock -- as part of a Securities and Exchange Commission initiative to curb abusive short sales. Potentially abusive sales, which include "naked shorting," have been blamed for turmoil in the stock market and even the 2008 demise of Bear Stearns Cos. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
The problem with the new information is that some experts think the data, when used alone, could be misleading. That is largely because the numbers don't show new short positions or the reasons why the sellers made their moves. In other words, not all short sellers are betting against a stock.
Unlike short-interest data, which are distributed twice a month and show the percentage of shares that have been sold short and not repurchased, short volume simply tracks the number of shares that are sold short over the course of a day.
On Sept. 10, for example, 391,032 shares of Google Inc. were sold short on the Nasdaq Stock Market, out of 880,911 shares of Google traded that day.
Investors often sell stock short -- or sell stock they don't already own -- in hopes the stock price will fall, allowing them to buy it back for a cheaper price. But the short-volume data in Google, and other stocks, don't disclose whether the short sales establish new positions, the red flags that typically signal bearish expectations for a stock.
For example, if a trader sells 100 shares short at 2 p.m. and then buys them all back an hour later, the short volume will still record 100 shares sold short. It won't account for the trader covering his short position.
"One of the concerns in the discussions so far involves the ability [of the data] to send false signals," said Frank Hathaway, chief economist for Nasdaq OMX Group Inc. "Investors would need to learn over time whether the pickup in short selling was normal or whether it was significant."
Market makers, for example, routinely sell stock short as they attempt to meet customer orders. Money managers also sell stock to hedge positions they take in other stocks or to take advantage of arbitrage situations. In neither of those cases are they making a directional bet on the price, so it isn't a bearish indicator.
To be sure, some experts think the data could be useful in some way but are wondering how investors will use the information when making trading decisions. There is some evidence that short-volume statistics can be a useful indicator. A 2008 study found that stocks heavily shorted tended to underperform those lightly shorted by an average of 1.2% over the course of 20 trading days.
"It's interesting that, despite all the weakness in the data, there is a very strong uniformity and very strong predictability," said Charles Jones, a professor of finance and economics at Columbia University and one of the authors of the study.
But Prof. Jones warned that this may not last. Traders using algorithmic and high-frequency strategies are big short sellers, weaving in and out of stocks on a short-term basis with no long-term view on the stock. "If that's the case, then there could be a lot more noise in this data than there used to be," he said.
Brokerage firms, meanwhile, say they prefer to provide customers with as much data as possible, even if it doesn't give clear signals on investment decisions.
"Is this going to be the magic sauce? I don't think so," said Tom Sosnoff, a senior vice president of TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. "But could this be another indicator we look at? Yes. It's 100 times better to have information out there than to regulate it."
Flippers are going to get cought with their pants down next week, I would say Tuesday. Quote me =)
Lol, you guys are funny. All this frustration, at least imo, is due to the fact that EIGH has not had a big run in a couple of weeks. Sitting at your computer and watching this stock is like watching grass grow, you wont see shit. BUT, walk away for two weeks and you have a damn jungle growing in your front yard. Lol, go watch TV, play golf, ride your bike it really does not matter, but watching EIGH movement all day might drive you crazy on days like today ;p
Looks like we are back in business.
Market is screwing up right now. The Ask/Bid on most stocks is not accurate. I have friends using a few different platforms and L2 is all over the place.
EDIT: JUST AFTER POSTING THIS I LOOKED AND THINGS SEEM TO BE BACK IN ORDER
Did something insane just happen I dont know about? My Scottrade is showing some crazy bid/ask numbers...
Its MM's selling air shares. They are so short with MDGC they cant let it run before they cover. imo
I do the same thing, look for patterns in the way a stock moves just to get an idea of when it might run and for how long before I see a small retreat. Since my funds are fairly limited, most of my buying is done during the retreats. Like now ;p
This thing goes up in the morning and back down in the afternoon, almost like clockwork. EIGH has been a flippers paradise lately.
Looks like we got ourselves a good ol fashion standoff going on right now with EIGH this morning ;p
I agree. I am done posting here for a while, I think people got a little tired of me today so I may come back in a week or so. I would suggest taking a look at my post from about 30 minutes ago concerning their lawyer, make your own conclusion of course, just interesting to say the least.
ONE last thing, I swear
Stephen Vitola is not listed on http://www.martindale.com
For those not familiar with Martindale, it is essentially the yellow pages for lawyers. This is where every lawyer WANTS to be listed, there is a membership fee in order to be listed, but you will find every big name lawyer on this site, as well as sole practition lawers, hell, even lawyers who go to traffic court are on this site. This is THE SITEfor anyone practicing law. If you want to test it out, google a law firm, find the name of 1 of their lawyers and then search martindale and see what comes up, I just tried it 3 times with random firms and they came up each time.
I am NOT bashing, I still own shares. I am ONLY trying to get answers before I increase my position.
Let me make 1 thing clear, I am not bashing, if I was, I would sell my shares. I only call things how I see them. I see the wording as slightly deceptive, thats all im saying.
Let me give an example (real life story):
While I was in undergrad, I lived in an on-campus dorm. The school wanted to promote safe dating practices so would hand out "protection" and leave it where people living in the dorm could get them. To make a long story short, only Resident Assitants could go get the "protection" from the school then pass it out, but, my friends and I wanted to play a prank on some people and we needed a few hundred of them. So, a friend and I went to the Residence life office and asked for 7 boxes of protection, the woman we spoke to obviously knew only Resident Assistants could make these sorts of requests so she asked "and who are you?", my response was this "Westminster hall, 6th floor", she seemed pleased with my response and gave us what we wanted.
The moral of this story, yes, I did live in Westminster hall, on the 6th floor, was I a resident Assistant? No, but my answer HINTED to the fact that I had some sort of authority and the woman made a natural assumption.
Sorry for the long story most of you will probably think is stupid and pointless. My point is mainly that the reference to the firm caused ME TO MAKE THE FALSE ASSUMPTION that they had retained the firm and I PERSONALLY feel that it is misleading. Does that make me a moron? Sure, why not.
Personally, I do feel it is deceptive. They sited a major firm to help accrediate the attnorney they have hired, but, the firm has absolutely no connection to this case. It would be like if a car company said "Yea, buy this car because Bill Gates drives it" then they gave a Microsoft company background to help legitimize their claim. Yes, Microsoft is extremely successful, yes Bill Gates is successful, but, that does not say ANYTHING about the car.
And to the poster who said something along the lines of an attorney or firm wont take a case unless they know they will win, that's not necissarily true. Lawyers are paid by the hour, win or lose. An IP (intellectual property)lawyer can easily charge $850.00 an hour to do research only to find that you don't have a case. They get paid either way. Of course winning a case is always the best possible outcome, but, many freelance lawyers will take a case either way because they are paid for their time.
When I look a little closer at the PR, it does kinda hint at a past tense when it comes to Mr. Vitola. It says he "HAS represented Kenyton & Kenyton of New York for over a decade". Perhaps, since it is clear he is no longer at the firm, he is doing this as a freelance project? Either way, if this guy is in fact, no longer at this firm MediaG3 is being slightly deceptive in my opinion in regards to mentioning him and this firm as though they were handing the case.
I will keep the board posted, I doubt I will hear anything before Friday though, he is extremely busy. If he says its ok, I will even post what he finds on here, if not, I will just give a detailed summary.
I have no doubt that what you just said is 100% true. I only decided today to call in a favor because I know the info I get will be 110% accurate. The attorney I know has been in intellectual property law (and is a partner at 1 of the worlds largest IP firms) for about 15 years, he can and will find out info that I dont even know how to begin to look for.
ummm,were the posts question MDGC's legitimacy deleted or am I just not seeing them? Was going to have a friend in D.C. who works at an IP firm look into a few things for me.
someone posted on here yesterday that they work in this industry and that they KNOW the technology clearwire is CURRENTLY using, they do in fact own the patent for.
Any truth to this? If it is true, does MDGC still benefit at all from this?
I meant shorted by MM's
I bet if someone looks at the numbers there was at least 40% shorted today
Very understandable, lol and the "2 steps forward, 1 step back" was me btw ;p
This is probably a dumb question but...
What exactly will it take to make this thing move? I am not geting impatient or thinking of selling by any means, I am just curious as to what exactly is causing us to be temporarily stuck in this general range. We have had positive news, the clothing line SOLD out, web sites have launched and still something about the .10 wall seems to be holding us back in a major way.
By the way, I dont know how to read charts too well just yet so to you pro chartists this may all seem pretty stupid, im just trying to understand.