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.
It may but who knows. I hop we don't have to live through any litigation.
It may but who knows. I hop we don't have to live through any litigation.
No, not at all. Their messaging system is IP based but they still utilize MMS for picture/video messaging. It's just interesting that once again we are seeing IP as this forms the basis of the VPLM patents, not that I think WhatsApp infringes.
Check out my post #11552
Just out of curiosity, who are you referring to?
The thing is I am not trying to say WhatsApp even infringes on any of the VPLM technology, I am just saying that IP technology is going to lead us through the next phase of human evolution. Apparently so much so that large tech companies are willing to pay a massive premium for the chance to own a piece. Obviously VPLM parents are geared to this.
FYI
Like SMS, WhatsApp is linked to a phone number, which simplifies addressing in terms of recipient uniqueness, but unlike SMS is IP-based so you don’t have to worry if your operator has an SMS interconnect agreement with a recipient roaming in some godforsaken country. The app does multimedia, so obviating that awful, pathetic dogshow called MMS. It costs fractions of a penny per message.
Mobile operators hate it. Dutch operator KPN foolishly tried to attack it on low-end packages, leading to an outcry and passing of net neutrality laws. No surprise here — operators took US$105.5-billion in SMS revenues last year; almost all of which was pure profit.
But IP-based messaging is the future. A couple of platforms will grow and usurp SMS. Will it be open source, open standards systems like XMPP/Jabber? Not likely. This is a winner-take all space, and open source just generally fails to gain popular appeal (no, Android is not open source).
Not yet but soon enough.
I have been doing some light reading on Whatsapp, I found this interesting article from 2011. I highlighted an interesting point in BOLD towards the bottom but I really found it unique to our conversations because it is the way of the future.
It’s an open secret that SMS is a cash-cow for operators. They can charge obscene amounts for messages (compared to the cost of delivering them), obscene amounts that become crimes against humanity when they rape you for sending SMS when roaming. WhatsApp is one of the best alternatives — and one that may actually have a future when compared to much earlier incarnations like MXit that have millions of users but are still trying to find a way to make money.
First, WhatsApp’s functionality. Quick to cover, there’s not an awful lot to it. Once you’ve installed the app (for iOS, Android, BlackBerry and Nokia) you register. This requires that you give a cellphone number, triggering a reply message from WhatsApp that validates your phone and login, and ties the app to your handset.
This was a smart move — or a dismal architecture fail, but I’m going to give the devs a pass because it works in many unexpected ways. By only being able to use Whatsapp on one device, you radically reduce flexibility for a few users (like gadget reviewers) that swap back and forth between devices often, but most people won’t care. What it definitely does do, however, is radically simplify the architecture that WhatsApp needs to support on the back end. Simpler, more robust, hopefully less expensive to develop and maintain, which means a cheap, reliable service for you and me. Win.
When you sign in for the first time, it scans your address book and tells you who else you know is using WhatsApp — because obviously it can match phone numbers to WhatsApp users. This is brilliant, because a major “barrier to use” of any messaging app is who you can contact with it. Immediately I was able to swap from texting some people to WhatsApping them. Making people change their habits is hard — tying the user to the phone number makes address book population effortless. Win.
Once running, the app now runs in the background as a daemon to notify you of new messages. It’s fairly efficient, I’ve never seen any significant impact on phone performance (tested it on BlackBerry Bold, Nokia E7, HTC Desire Z, even the little Samsung Gio). It’s not a marvel of tinyness, taking up 9.5MB of memory (compared to Skype at 5.7, K-9 Mail at 5.6, Twitter at 4.6 –but a a lot better than MXit’s 15MB!)
The app doesn’t do an awful lot — but then again, why always with the feature-stuffing?
It’s a fairly simple interface. You have a WhatsApp contact list (populated from your address book), you click on a name, type a message, hit send. Replies are threaded left and right in a visually intuitive way, and that’s pretty much the totality of the functionality.
Sending media files is trivial, and it has a nice feature where it shows a thumbnail of the item in the message stream for when you want to go back to it. It also stores any transferred media files in a separate WhatsApp folder which some find aggravating, I find convenient.
It does emoticons, and does it ever have a wide selection of some of the weirdest icons ever. Smiling face, frowning face, crying face, six different colour hearts, sixteen faces of varying ethnicities and occupations (yes please, I do need an icon for an Inuit fire-fighter for my next conversation). It has icons for countless meteoric conditions, animals, including frog, fox and furry monkey (two of), and bafflingly, a camel and warthog. In case you need them, there’s also a Shintoist couple and pack of MacDonald’s fries. WTF?
WhatsApp even pretends to be a real time messaging app by telling you what time the contact was last online, or whether they’re typing or not. This is a feature that should be murdered like a cluster of garden snails, as it’s horrifically hit or miss (was the person actually online? Or did the background service just wake up for no good reason?), and can result in irritation, frustration, confusion and phoning someone who’s fast asleep after a late night because WhatsApp told you they were awake.
In terms of portability, you can back up your messages to an SD card, and import them onto a new phone. Quick and easy.
Now we return to the million dollar question. Will WhatsApp survive and prosper where so many messaging platforms have struggled in a twilight world of user base growth and cash-flow burn?
WhatsApp does not report any useful numbers — not revenue, not userbase (although it’s in the 10 to 50-million downloads range in Android Market, with 270 000 reviews). It has a revenue model based on Ruby on Rails creator David Heinemeier Hansson’s recommendation: Put a price on it.
The app is free (for everyone but iPhone users, sorry suckers, that’s US$0.99), and free to use for the first year, then it’s US$1.99 per year (so get ‘em hooked then charge a negligible annuity income).
Contrast this with MXit, which probably has similar user numbers in the 20-million range. MXit is free to download and use, but the company has spent the last few years fruitlessly casting about for ways to monetise this. MXit Moola, wallets, markets — all very nice, but the user base wants to chat. For free (or as close as possible to free). Connecting the cheapskate chat users with spending cash is just not working.
So while WhatsApp is small, elegant, simple and task-specific, MXit is big, complicated and clumsy.
The advantage MXit currently has is its investment in client versions for a gazillion different handset models, from the most basic feature phone to the smartphonest. WhatsApp is currently stuck in the top end of the market — although not a bad place to be as we see the entry of cheap Android phones for the masses.
And so we come to the last big question: will apps like WhatsApp kill SMS?
The simple reality now is that SMS is desirable only because it pretty much works anywhere in the world, with any operator, on any handset. Apart from that, it’s shit.
Primitive, and no presence or meaningful delivery confirmation capability. With WhatsApp you can see your message was transmitted (one tick on screen) and received (double tick). You can (sort of) see that the other person is online to you. You also don’t get spammed (yet) as you only get messages from your closed user group.
Like SMS, WhatsApp is linked to a phone number, which simplifies addressing in terms of recipient uniqueness, but unlike SMS is IP-based so you don’t have to worry if your operator has an SMS interconnect agreement with a recipient roaming in some godforsaken country. The app does multimedia, so obviating that awful, pathetic dogshow called MMS. It costs fractions of a penny per message.
Mobile operators hate it. Dutch operator KPN foolishly tried to attack it on low-end packages, leading to an outcry and passing of net neutrality laws. No surprise here — operators took US$105.5-billion in SMS revenues last year; almost all of which was pure profit.
But IP-based messaging is the future. A couple of platforms will grow and usurp SMS. Will it be open source, open standards systems like XMPP/Jabber? Not likely. This is a winner-take all space, and open source just generally fails to gain popular appeal (no, Android is not open source).
Personally, I’m rooting for WhatsApp. Two bucks a year vs half a buck a message? Appsolutely.
Who it’s for:
Everyone! (with a smartphone)
insert-text-here
Thanks for the reminder Jim, sometimes I get caught up in the mobile sense but this is a great point, I quoted some numbers prior regarding mobile but could we just say every phone in the world will need the VPLM patent technology going forward within the next what, say 5 years, I mean lets be honest, the infrastructure to convert the majority of all landlines into IP digital is already there.
VVVVVV,
I agree whole heartedly with your analysis and again i have always been a 1-2 billion kind of guy but here is the other side of how i realistically think of a greater amount.
WhatsApp goes for 19 billion with a user base of 450 million subscribers, more or less a great amount of those i estimate to already be Facebook subscribers, ya or nay!
5.6 billion celluar phone users in the world, VPLM technology can be applied to all of the smart phone users so for the right buyer, lets say Samsung for argument sake. i Say this because they own over 80% of the global market for smart phone operating systems with Android, then they also control licensing for the remainder with this technology.
All i am saying is if these patents are what we believe they are then can we not say that who ever buys them controls even 4-8 times what WhatsApp had? Just saying!
Here is my opinion on the perception that you seem to have. there will be no announcements until the final and 5th patent is physically in hand, this is quite clear when you listen to the BOD CC on the website, they do not want anything to jeopardize these assets. To say they (potential suitors) are not lined up out the door, I disagree, I feel that at the very least they have been lined up to at least kick the tires, whether or not the offers are flooding in, I cant say, perhaps the BOD has said they will not take offers until they have everything in place to justify a bidding war. Now with that said, I have always maintained a sell price of 1-2 billion but with what has transpired today between Facebook and Whatsapp, who knows now. I mean really, 19 billion for a company that provides an unlimited messaging site, here we have a patent that provides for unlimited local calling from anywhere in the world and for 19 billion I will throw in 4 more patents for a buck.
Did you mean "why they are not lined up".
I agree that is the higher chance of any further news. I encourage you guys to really analyze the BOD CC, I listened again this week more than once and found a lot of information quite relevant for this time even though it was recorded months ago. here is my personal summary.
1) Emil Malak makes some relevant points regarding publicity. he implies that the lack of publicity is rather deliberate on his part, he doesn't want any risk to the patents, he asked the BOD not to push for a great amount of publicity in order to protect the technology.
2) Emil also speaks to the fact that it was himself who stalled on the patents proceeding as there was some concerns about prior art that they wished to address. Additionally he also wished to add continuation patents throughout N. America and then Europe, India and Brazil. (Keep in mind this is 5 patents with a bunch of babies as Emil states.)
With all this in mind I don't feel there have been any challenges to the patents externally of late, thus I personally summarize that the qualified entities that have approached VPLM have done so because they wish to have this technology and have conceded that the purchase of them is the only way they can obtain them.
It is also mentioned that at the time of the CC, the market value of VPLM was $72,000,000 with only LI issued. Now we stand here today with 4 patents in hand and a market value of approximately $183,000,000. It was touched on recently that this company could be sold before the 5th patent was issued but the feeling that comes from the CC is there will be no publicity and no deal until all patents were in hand to protect these assets. The 5 patents are more valuable together than they are individually.
I would be happy to have news this Tuesday that says its all done and finished and we all make millions but the chance of that is un-likely!
I have to disagree with you, I think it says there is something going on. Small sums selling low bringing the price down followed by large share volumes going off. As far as I feel, the fact that we are seeing sales so often of less than 100 shares tells me that people are really trying to manipulate the price. Go long or go home
...
Pease elaborate.
I agree with you but did I say something to the contrary, I was merely answering a previous post.
If you listen to the CC on the company website, they seem pretty adamant that there is not going to be a share increase and at this time there doesnt appear to be a need for capital as all the bills have been paid, the only reason for them to increase issued shares would simply be to raise capital to fund the monetization process, again something that didnt seem to be a direction they wish to go but who knows. If this company does not get taken out for whatever reason, i am all good with monetization and revenue streams.
Why does it have to be quickly, not that i want this to drag on for ever? Aquisitions take time, remeber there are generally shareholders on both sides of the fence that the respective parties are looking out for and there will never be any news relesaed/leaked unless the parties involved want to end the negotiations or manipulate the price or come to a mutually benefical agreement. This copany has no revenue thus no dividends meaning it is not for the faint of heart, it is purely an intellectual property that has tremendous value at the end of the day and for most of us here, we only wish to capitalize on that potential, thats it, love it or hate it.
I love when i see a sale of 10 shares that literally moves the value of a company millions of dollars, if anyone really cares about the daily price of a stock then they are in for the wrong reasons, please someone drive the value of this stock to .0001 cents, i would love the opportunity to buy your shares. This company will get sold and i am pretty sure it will be for more than any price we have ever seen it trading for.
Eric Schmidt says that 2014 will be a huge year for technology in mobile communication, he believes mobile has won the race! The Patents that VPLM now own may not all be revolutionary however they are most certainly being violated by many providers currently, this alone makes the case for ongoing revenue for VPLM or any other company that wishes to make money. The only thing left to do now is determine how much but i can tell you in my opinion it is Billions, not Millions, that is just the logic speaking. Consumers will continue to embrace mobile technology as being stuck behind a computer, or running to the house phone is yesterdays news. when a person wants info now, they have it at their finger tips, the only thing left to do is make that even easier, lets say telepathy communication, oh wait, Google is already heading there with Google Glass, but i digress, it still needs to be connected to a network and that is where RBR, Mobile Gateway etc etc comes in...
I agree, there has never been one word as to how much this "Lottery" was going to pay out, call it what you want but its a gamble even if you want to think otherwise, this company and the patents it has are only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.
Lets keep the conversation going there, Rich is a hired consultant who has no bearing on what transpires as far as the operations and negotiations of this company, he is trying to make a living and unfortunately it looks like he took a job with Bernie Madoffs cousin, so be it, have you always made perfect choices. I am more interested in the fact that we now have a notice of Allowability on the 5th and final patent "UI", even more interesting is the fact that it appears that VPLM itself was the one that entered a petition to do its own DD regarding prior art and that the USPTO didn't have an issue with any infringement on prior technology, only after they completed their own investigation did they re-enter the patent for re-approval. Thoughts?
Great find indeed, I think I saw the "Sun" it was just seen setting into oblivion.;)
Exactly and an $8 pps may happen in that situation but $25 would be excessive IMO, at some point any bidders would concede and try and arrange a licensing arrangement with the purchasing party, keep in mind the cost for licensing would only increase for any losing party if they continued to drive the cost up.
Hmm, I was thinking more about a bump to .35c and then I still maintain my estimate of somewhere between $1-$2 dollars on buyout, I cant justify why anyone would throw out numbers like $8 - $25 dollars but I am open to rational explanation's and constructive conversation justifying such numbers. There is one recent memory buyout that occurred that I am thinking of to perhaps position my opinion, July 2013 Cisco acquires Sourcefire for 2.7 billion, this company did have substantial revenue but really no profit, it is however the best example I can come up with within the tech sector. IMHO
Sorry, my post was not clear, I meant to ask more what this means relative to the stock and any potential buyout, not so much about the patent issuance.
I agree, the next PR will be about UI but perhaps it may coincide with something further, regardless, here is all the updates to the UI patent, does anyone wish to wager a guess as to the last update here from USPTO! "02-04-2014 Corrected Notice of Allowability"
Date
Transaction Description
02-04-2014 Corrected Notice of Allowability
01-29-2014 Pubs Case Remand to TC
01-23-2014 Electronic Information Disclosure Statement
01-23-2014 Quick Path IDS Request
01-23-2014 Information Disclosure Statement considered
01-23-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-23-2014 Mail-Record Petition Decision of Granted to Withdraw from Issue
01-23-2014 Record Petition Decision of Granted to Withdraw from Issue
01-23-2014 Petition Entered
01-23-2014 Workflow - Request for RCE - Begin
01-23-2014 Dispatch to FDC
01-22-2014 Application Is Considered Ready for Issue
Here is what I see for transaction history of the UI patent as of Jan 29, 2014
Looking at this it appears that the patent is proceeding and perhaps it has been asked to be fast tracked to final issue, it also appears that the issue fee was paid last Nov 27. I can say I do not know all the ins and outs of how these items are recorded so any insight on the following remarks could benefit all.
Transaction Description
01-29-2014 Pubs Case Remand to TC
01-23-2014 Electronic Information Disclosure Statement
01-23-2014 Quick Path IDS Request
01-23-2014 Information Disclosure Statement considered
01-23-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-23-2014 Mail-Record Petition Decision of Granted to Withdraw from Issue
01-23-2014 Record Petition Decision of Granted to Withdraw from Issue
01-23-2014 Petition Entered
01-23-2014 Workflow - Request for RCE - Begin
01-23-2014 Dispatch to FDC
01-22-2014 Application Is Considered Ready for Issue
10-09-2013 Workflow - Request for CPA - Finish
12-10-2013 Email Notification
12-10-2013 Printer Rush- No mailing
12-10-2013 Mail Response to 312 Amendment (PTO-271)
12-05-2013 Response to Amendment under Rule 312
11-27-2013 Issue Fee Payment Verified
12-03-2013 Pubs Case Remand to TC
11-27-2013 Amendment after Notice of Allowance (Rule 312)
11-27-2013 Response to Reasons for Allowance
11-26-2013 Supplemental Papers - Oath or Declaration
11-26-2013 Miscellaneous Incoming Letter
12-03-2013 Email Notification
12-03-2013 Filing Receipt - Replacement
11-27-2013 Issue Fee Payment Received
11-26-2013 Workflow - Request for CPA - Begin
10-09-2013 Electronic Review
10-09-2013 Email Notification
10-09-2013 Mail Notice of Allowance
10-04-2013 Document Verification
10-04-2013 Notice of Allowance Data Verification Completed
10-04-2013 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
09-30-2013 Reasons for Allowance
09-30-2013 Examiner's Amendment Communication
09-16-2013 Interview Summary - Examiner Initiated
09-13-2013 Reference capture on IDS
09-13-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
09-13-2013 Information Disclosure Statement considered
09-13-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-16-2012 Information Disclosure Statement considered
06-21-2012 Information Disclosure Statement considered
08-03-2012 Information Disclosure Statement considered
09-06-2012 Information Disclosure Statement considered
09-10-2012 Information Disclosure Statement considered
01-14-2013 Information Disclosure Statement considered
05-31-2013 Information Disclosure Statement considered
07-08-2013 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
05-31-2013 Reference capture on IDS
05-31-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
05-31-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-19-2013 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
01-14-2013 Reference capture on IDS
01-14-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-14-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
09-10-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
09-06-2012 Reference capture on IDS
09-06-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
09-10-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
09-06-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
08-03-2012 Reference capture on IDS
08-03-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
08-03-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
08-02-2012 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
07-10-2012 Email Notification
07-10-2012 Change in Power of Attorney (May Include Associate POA)
07-06-2012 Email Notification
07-05-2012 PG-Pub Issue Notification
06-21-2012 Reference capture on IDS
06-21-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
06-21-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-16-2012 Reference capture on IDS
03-16-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-19-2012 Application Dispatched from OIPE
03-30-2012 Email Notification
03-30-2012 Email Notification
03-17-2012 371 Completion Date
03-29-2012 Sent to Classification Contractor
03-30-2012 Filing Receipt
03-30-2012 Notice of DO/EO Acceptance Mailed
03-16-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-16-2012 Cleared by OIPE CSR
03-16-2012 Initial Exam Team nn
Precisely what i was going for, however if someone can provide me absolute evidence that it has been approved i will humbly apologize.
Thanks NRG i have not figured out the link posting yet for this site but again i ask PennyGrinder where the approval info came from?
Thanks Thrill, that's all I can find also. An approval notice would get me excited however.
VVV, I haven't heard anything definitive, the majority of what I speak to is general, there will be no press release by any party until things are signed, sealed and delivered but if what was said regarding the approval of final patent is true, then I can only assume that if a deal was in place, it will progress quickly which means people on the move to come together for a signing and then hopefully a news release. the time frame to cash out may be 60-180 days, who knows but that has no relevance regarding an announcement. If Microsoft or Google or any other fortune 500 company has approached VPLM, do you really think that they would make it public knowledge, that would only be detrimental to their objective of getting the best value for the money. Does anyone believe that Bill Gates would call up Eric Schmidt and say hey, I have been looking into buying this company called VPLM, it has great intellectual property that will really protect my investment in Skype, not to mention it would be a great move to really put a squeeze on your mobile business, also they have a patent called lawful intercept, I tried to get it a while back but it was declined, I guess that was my fault for hiring the programmers from Digifonica who initially worked on the VPLM patent, I mean hey they only copied 75% of the original patent. additionally, does anyone think that VPLM is so stupid to announce that we have received an offer but only one, its from Google for 2.5 billion dollars and is contingent of final patent approval, Google goes hmmm, backs out and then once final approval comes in and says well, I guess we are the only ones so how does 5 bucks sound... IMHO, people waiting for news, its like waiting for a toaster to pop, or watching paint dry. relax, enjoy. One way or the other the ride will begin and some of us will enjoy and others will be disappointed... This is why I suggest people call IR, just see if there is movement, that's how the American Government detects threats, that look through a satellite picture, that's all we can do, look for movement.
Here's my opinion. I feel that a deal was done in principal sometime in the last two months, if you have ever been involved in a business transaction of substantial relevance you would understand the first order of business, an iron clad confidentiality agreement to which all parties keep their mouths sealed to limit all kinds of possible effects, none more important than keeping both parties "together" and in an amicable environment. I feel that any announcement would not transpire until all patents have final approval, why would any buyer enter into a situation of purchasing an asset unless the seller owned it. hmmm. with that, again I ask for someone to please provide a credible link to a confirmation of final patent approval, then I suggest that someone call IR and ask where the BOD are this weekend? have a prosperous day, week and lifetime...
PG
Can you share a reference for the notice of approval? Thanks.
NRG, for my wallets sake I hope you are right.
Let's play CLUE!
Microsoft appears to have the most to lose, more than anyone including Google would have to gain. so with that being said, i think it will be Microsoft in the central western United States on February the 4th with the $2-$3 dollar a share bid. Just my opinion however. A cheap insurance policy to protect Skype if you ask me.
Wrong TATA, TATA Motors...
www.news.silobreaker.com/tata-honcho-dies-in-mishap-5_2267691376290299908
Google and Samsung agree to license each others patents, ie: pay for the use of the others intellectual property, exactly what we hope drives the price of VPLM, ie: Samsung, Google, T Mobile, Microsoft, Cysco, WiLan and heck, lets throw in some America Movil, old Carlos was never one to turn down a great opportunity...etc etc etc perhaps they all try the best to outbid the others so they can license the patent technology to the rest of them and hold them for ransom for the next 20 years.