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.
"But unless it's a legal contract, there ARE no "promises". "
Just like the Amazon "settlement", right? Wouldn't hold my breath if I were you..
"So far, I think our team has done a bangup job of proving infringement"
In order for you to make that statement, you would have to have based it on something(s).
Care to share any such evidence? Link? Court doc? Image of Emu in your toast? Anything? Any one shred of substance to backup above statement..........or..............is it just so much baseless, empty talk? I'm not saying it isn't or can't be true..... REALLY......but I think it's a claim worthy of EVIDENCE. I predict excuses blended with crickets. If it's too much to ask, you can say so. I won't laugh... Promise...
Yes I read the rules changed recently as well. I think the form 4 is supposed to be filed within 4 days or so
But...does.that rule apply when they are preplanned sells.....whaddya call it .....10b15 or something like that?
Aaaaaaaaaaaaand......
No one, ah say, ah say....NO one....
Can explain why....... every single alleged infringer in the world had the same exact idea as if members of the Borg.......to steal vplm's patents... hahahahaha
Can explain why.........every single alleged infringer, as if members of the Borg collective, is a rip-off.....hahahah
Can explain why......every single alleged infringer, already established to be part of the Borg mentality......went to the same place to steal the patents (the patent office?)
Can explain why.....every single alleged infringer......the Borg choose just anyone, even slow to understand msg board goers...lololol.....who chose to not put their shareholders best interests first and foremost when deciding why, if they know they are infringers, they wait until the damages are gonna cost them far more than if they just buy, license or settle now (or in the last several years). Isn't that just BRILLIANT?!
Can explain why....every single alleged infringer........hardy har har har ......can't wait for the vplm hit squad to come for them with triple damages......ho ho ho ho ho ha ha ......rather than extricating themselves quite easily and relatively cheaply now... Wow
Can explain why......every freakin last alleged infringer........omg omg.......thinking with the same single Borg mainframe brain........are ready willing and able to let their voip competition to just waltz right up and snatch up the patents out from under them, leaving them high and dry and totally vulnerable to said competitors NOW WITH THE MOST FOUNDATIONAL PATENTS ON THE PLANET THAT CAN AND WILL (yeah right...) Give full control of the largest communication vehicles in the world. OF COURSE THEY WOULD BE THAT DUMB, RIGHT? OF COURSE
Hehe......Mr market knows. I know. Numerous experienced shareholders and msg board goers know. Emu, Babs, Chang and other insider dumpers (apparently know things ain't lookin good) know. All those who took an exit know.......m
Buy you and you and you and you (y'all know who you are) jez don't get it......
That's why all refuse to answer the question about buying the patents or company if you had the cash. Yup, that IS why. Best question ever posed here and none can answer. Hell, few can even muster a civil post. That's why it's one of the top read boards.....they come for the entertainment.......the same ones whose favorite show is Jerry Springer.
Well there you go, we both agree on something. I don't think I minimized any of your conclusions, per se. Normally that's not the way I want to deal. But then again, it comes down to definitions. What you think is minimizing, I may have looked at differently. To me, minimizing someone's ideas or opinions is similar to namecalling or insulting for it's own sake and/or having a lack of respect for someone's opinion. I hope I havent done that without even realizing it, but at the moment I'm think we both may have done something like that...? Not sure. If I have and you point it out, I'll retract and apologize. Peoples ideas and opinions may be right or wrong but shouldn't be dissed.
Not only that but that .45 was just a fluke basically that was based on major outside pumping and the IPR news and it lasted what ....about 20.seconds? Lolol. It did take it's time going back to crap again. About a month if I recall. I caught a small part of it I think. But even if I had been paying attention to it I most likely would not have sold at 45 cuz I woulda waited for minimum of 50. Peeps here were betting it would sell anytime soon for as much as 25 billion. It was a riot to behold.
Sad? You must be joking again. Sad for who.... you? Not sad for me. I'm not the least bit sad. I'm a winner with vplm and since I'm not a big stock expert and had already previously lost a lot on paper with vplm and seen another similar company go rogue and get busted after 50 yrs I decided it was best for me to stop buying vplm forever and that has most definitely saved me a bundle as I look back at the performance since I made that decision. So I have no idea what you think is sad. But it's not me. I invested a few grand in pennystocks and a few big board back in 98/99 because my common sense told me it was a big opportunity and I did buy and trade quite a few different stocks and most of them were just trash that I didn't know any better but..........I never once went into the red with my initial investment money to this day so I've nothing to be sad about in that realm. You're SADly mistaken, but I already know that you choose to believe in whatever you do same as everyone else does for the most part so good luck with vplm. I hope it shoots way up someday but not holding my breath for that.
"they already grabbed it"
That's because you believe whatever they tell you......
I know that's a fact because you have no proof of that.
It's not possible for you to have any proof of it....as I know how all that works.
So you just swallow the party line. Not everyone associates with the inside is privvy to everything only the need to know very small group.
That's ok.......you're not the only one to buy what their selling. You're not the only one to fail to realize the sophistication that can be attained now days, esp someone with the experience of the Emu. And you're not the only one to forget that there are scams out there far above what you would expect. They exist. I've seen it happen before. I was involved as a shareholder with such a company for 5 yrs or so and that company was in business for 50 yrs and had a BELOVED CEO and had govt support. And they had an army of world's greatest lawyers too.
Let me hip you to the real facts. Unless you were an engineer who specialized in voip telephony and computer tech, and had an advanced knowledge of code writing and applied that to at least all of the vplm core patents AND every single patent in question that's in litigation AND had exclusive access to all of that AND the time to thoroughly go thru it all and make the comparisons to prove infringement...... then you're nothing more than a belieber. Or if you had a close friend with all those attributes who felt you deserved to know what he knows.......then you have nothing to go on EXCEPT the party line so to speak, that is generated by the party AND NOT ANY SORT OF TRUE OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE AND COMPARISON SCHEMATIC LAID OUT FOR YOU.
And for many, maybe most, that's ok cuz that's enough for them, along with the fact that being positive is inherent to the amount of dollars you invested and what you choose to divulge on this board. And you may very well be totally correct in the end about emu and the patents. I'm not 100%... only about 98 or 99.
SO, IF YOU CHOOSE TO BELIEVE THAT EVERY SINGLE VOIP SERVICE PROVIDER ON THE PLANET IS JUST AS DISHONEST AS THE NEXT ONE AND THST THEY ALL, EVERY LAST ONE IS A THIEF WHO ROBBED VPLM AND WHO ALL HAVE THE EXACT SAME THOUGHTS TO DO THIS AND THE SAME MENTALITY AND THE SAME MORAL COMPASS OR LACK THEREOF AND ACTED IN UNISON AS THOUGH THEY ARE PART OF THE BORG AND SAID WE WILL ASSIMILATE VPLM..........AND MOST OF ALL........THEY ALL DECIDED, EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM, EVERY LAST CEO.........THAT KNOWING THEY ARE GUILTY AND KNOWING THEY ARE INFRINGING AND KNOWING FULL WELL THAT VPLM HAS CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED THEY CAN RAISE ALL THE CASH THEY NEED AS THEY HAVE DONE SO FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS.........AND KNOWING THAT ITS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE VPLM GETS TO THEM TO SUE THEM AND THAT THE COSTS AND THE DAMAGES KEEPS GROWING AS MORE AND MORE TIME GOES BY........AND SO ITS SIMPLY INEVITABLE THEY WILL HAVE TO PAY PAY PAY THRU THEIR TEETH EVEN IF THEY ARE FORCED TO SETTLE................................THAT THAT is BETTER THAN JUST BUYING, LICENSING OR SETTLING NOW IN ORDER TO SAVE A TON OF MONEY FOR THEIR SHAREHOLDERS..............AND THAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM REACHED THIS SAAAAAAME CONCLUSION. DID I MENTION EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM?
thenIha esomeoceanfrontpropertyforyoucheap
Ok, now (hopefully) a shorter, less heady reply...
I wonder what you meant by the "misinterpreted" comment? Doesn't mean your opinions have been misinterpreted or you have misinterpreted others opinions?
I don't know if anyone is fortunate to have my take. I feel I am though.
Um...deferring to me on direction is hard for me to swallow....... nevertheless I have a policy of not giving any buy or sell or hold advice as I think that is solely the job of the shareholder or potential one. That said, you know I decided years ago to stop buying vplm after being lucky enough to recoup the losses I'd incurred. To be fair, there was still enough wide ranging price movement at the time for me to get away with it. In not knowledgeable enough about day/swing trading to continue with that, like orca. I would likely lose all that I gained. So it was a smart move for me. At this point I think one would have to risk big bucks to make small bucks.
You also, no doubt know what I think about the prospects for vplm and future. It's not due to great stocks and patent law knowledge. My belief is much the same as how we have come so far in knowing all there is to know about atoms and nano particles without being able to actually see them directly. It's through inference and then testing those inferences even tho they are not direct evidence. That might not be the best analogy but my bottom line lack of belief in vplm and the patents comes from 2 places. The main one is that no one has grabbed such a priceless treasure (if "all that") and the other is all the things vplm has done or not done over the yrs which I interpreted as negatives and dot connecting. All the good stuff I see as a front. And I know I could be totally wrong but doubt it.
Well, I tried................to be shorter that is
Mr double L,
Thanx for that most persuasive set of comments. The reason I use the word persuasive is, while I have some idea of your intellect, and I really don't want to appear contentious for it's own sake (which no doubt many think is the case..), still it would be disingenuous of me if I didn't reveal that sometimes, no, many times, no close to always....(sorry) I, possibly mistakenly, find your listings to be....well, let me just say....something at least a little more than the posts generally seem to suggest. They seem to be a front for other things that if you said them straight up, you've learned that at least here on this board, you can too easily get into trouble. And you seem sly as a fox about it, lol. I don't think I'm wrong, but I know full well that I could be as maybe my imagination plays a much greater part than I think it does so I better apologize in case you say I'm in left field on this even tho I could show alot, haha, of evidence for my perception.
A small example but not the best by any means is yest you sent me the court info which I appreciated probably due to something I said. I was surprised but it was a good thing. I found no need to share it as it was out there for all to see. Then it was followed by 3 more ppl posting the same. That's cool. They prolly didn't see the 1st one plus one of them had the actual court msg. Anyway, I then asked you if it meant what I thought it did, only a minute later but you didn't reply. That made me think you gave me the info maybe because I complained about something related. Not important. More on point, I noticed months ago, when someone made what I thought was a rude and unfair comment about the plethora of info you were offering up here. You immediately said something to the effect of that you didn't want to disrupt the board due to your postings, therefore was ducking out. I could not take that as your genuine feeling but more of a veiled sarcasm. I've seen that kind of psychology used before and I kind of figured you'd be back after you heard pleas to keep on posting. Immediately I remember the lady from Hawaii begging you now to leave and some other positive comments. I wouldn't count you expected that and have it a little time to perculate, then after a time came back posting except now with what I've found to be a strange mix of comedy/sarcasm with a pinch of pseudo martryism thrown in.
It's great. I love it. I hope it doesn't offend that it's very entertaining and underneath you DO give out some very good and generous info. It's all good! I just wanted to reveal a little more of my insanity.... I should also mention and hat tip for never showing any disrespect or rudeness that is wholesale on this board. I can't help but wonder if you're an actual lawyer but you may not wish to divulge if so.
You have that wrong I must say. I haven't asked anyone to consider my opinions, theories, facts. I just put them out there. What ppl do with them is of course up to them. And how could you possibly say I don't consider theirs. If I didn't consider their opinions, I wouldn't be able to offer my rebuttals or my agreements, now would I? Curious to know what brings you to that conclusion. My opinions about vplm are very straightforward and consistent. Have you read my opinions and do you agree with? If not, does that mean you have not considered them? Of course I consider everything that inputs my senses in a most fair and balanced way.
The patents are bogus.
The patents are worthless.
One of the other or both is true imo.
Someone said that much has been done to show the patents are all that. (do I really have to explain what "all that" means every time I say it?). I disagree and challenge to show any direct evidence of same. Not some inferred but indirect conclusion, like "oh, there's microwave background radiation out there so that proves the big bang", but any shred of DIRECT evidence of infringement. Not inferred, DIRECT! I contend there is not a shred of any such direct, empirical evidence. So that does not, by any stretch, prove the patents are bogus, but they could be. I think they are bogus by indirect inference, ie, something has or hasn't happened, therefore I conclude... But.....in also find that what has or hasn't happened.......to be VERY VERY strong evidence, so I believe. I acknowledge not having proof. And just because a trial hasn't concluded anything yet, doesn't minimize my reasoning, beliefs and conclusions. Most all my predictions here for near 13 yrs have been correct.
* I didn't finish this...
The 2nd part is "worthless"
As far as I'm concerned, they have had near 20 yrs to show they have value and in that time have not made a dime. Some might say, "but they have, as all the other companies use them", but I maintain there's no proof of that so I say they are worthless. That could change in the future but I doubt it.
Interesting and true...........................................................until it isn't.
"Price is determined by what they do and how much revenue they bring in. Top athletes put people in seats, and buying jerseys and bring in more money to the teams than journeymen players. Voip-Pal patents are foundational technology that will bring in bring revs to the owners."
This needs to be separated into it's 2 parts to be fully understood.
""Price is determined by what they do and how much revenue they bring in."
That part is undeniably true and applies to any and all products.
In the case of vplm, the patents were created close to 20 yrs ago and I'm sure if there was any way for any of them to do what they allegedly do and there was a buyer or any other way to convert to revenue, the owners would have done so...unless the the payment offered was simply too small. In any event, in the case of vplm patents, never been any revenue generated and THAT, above, is the criteria, the hallmark.. Nothing there, so the given requirement, has not been met........for a very very long time. As to what they do, there is no known proof of that. In fact, there is no known anything not even an indicator. (Hmmmm....maybe THATS why vplm promised to fold the tech into their alleged voip service provider platform........but then DIDNT). Only vplm saying they were tested but to my knowledge the test results have never been made available. Thus, both above criteria have not been met in any way, shape or form.
You can jump up and down and stand on your head, swearing the patents can do this, that and the other, but I am handling it as in a court of law. No proofee, no infringee.
The 2nd part:
"Voip-Pal patents are foundational technology that will bring in bring revs to the owners."
* this attempts to offer itself as fact but it's nothing more than an unsubstantiated claim.
"Are foundational" is someone's completely unproven opinion. A judge would of course, not just accept that. Therefore it's not true.............until it is........but for now......it ain't.
"that will bring in revenues to the owners"
* Yes and no. Needs to be unpacked. Indirectly, the STORY (the unsubstantiated claims) has served to bring tons of money to the owners via the share selling biz this is. But the patents have not directly garnered any conventional revenue, ever. So, in terms of the above requirements given, the patents are a FAIL.
One cannot make something be true, by conflating intentions and beliefs, with actual happenstance and reality. THAT is exactly what the OP attempted to do in the post.
Discernment young man, discernment.
Would you like help with something in particular?
Yada yada yada....
s'all I got..
What's your question?
I was almost finished with a reluctantly made reply but my phone ate it before I could and I don't know if I have the heart to rewrite it so for now I don't. Too bad it was a bonafide certified boomshakalaka.
Wow looks like all that "good news", esp the most recent news about getting into another discovery phase, has really set us ablaze! You can see it in the chart for the last 3 mos or 1 month and especially today! Go vplm!
Insider trading is not illegal
I don't blame you for APOLOGIZING for your posts. I, on the other hand would never apologize for saying what I believe and KNOWING it makes sense.
There you go again......taking statement out of context. I believe in said it was just smallish possibility. Just to cover the bases of any possible thing but that one is highly unlikely IF I'm correct that there are no infringers and they would know if they were infringing now wouldn't they?
You're just grabbing at straws
Explain it until you're blue in the face and the cows come home and you'll STILL BE WRONG and not be able to offer a shred of undeniable proof of your so called layers. The truth simply is that a positive outcome for an IPR adds no layers of anything else that the patent did not have the day it was born. Prove or show different. You can't because it doesn't exist except in your mind. Show me a single instance where a voip patent lawyer or a judge states that a positive IPR gives ANYTHING additional to a patent that it didn't already possess. Never happen cuz it doesn't. All in your mind.. Show me legally. Give a real world example. The only thing it does.......is prevent the bad that would be IF vplm lost an IPR. THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT WOULD NO LONGER BE A PATENT.
Layers of what? What is in the layer that wasn't there before?????
What is so hard to understand that you don't have to believe in a company to still know how and be able to trade it to profits? I did so and recouped ALL my paper losses long ago AFTER I decided vplm was a bogus play. There's this theme that runs thru here that you can't trade stock in a company you don't believe in. Why the F not? That's just crazed.
It's ridiculous for you say it doesn't make me look loyal. I told you I was a loyal shareholder and that I kept buying and buying and buying until I couldnt afford anymore. It was right around that same time that I began seeing the holes in vplm's while trip. however, I continued for awhile to keep buying because almost everyone here, including vplm, was saying in no uncertain terms that's sale was imminent AND FOR BIG BUCKS! So even tho I was beginning to waver in my loyalty, I hung in there for her awhile until it became so abundantly clear to me that the company was not what it was selling itself to be PLUS the price started plummeting and I was far underwater on paper. That's the way it was and it's not right for you to keep questioning the truth I tell. In have no need to lie and I have a good memory on the important stuff. You're wasting your time trying to bust my history here.
Duh. Don't you get it? He knows how to make bucks flipping. Doesn't require positive sentiment of company now does it?
Emu has demonstrated numerous times in the past how he conducts business...
Avatar TWICE!
Granville Hotel
Nightclub
A failed vplm for his whole tenure
Selling out now all the zillions of shares and killing the pps
Etc
Etc
Etc
Oh boy...
As if it's not bad enough that you twist my words and meanings around to suit yourself, now you are twisting YOUR OWN WORDS AROUND IN ATTEMPT TO BACK PEDAL THE MISDIRECTIONS AND FALLACIOUS CONCLUSIONS I SHOT DOWN...
You are so far off into left field it's not even funny, in comparison to what I have actually tried to convey...
Where to start......?
1st of all you indeed DID try to make my ideas sound foolish. That's exactly what you did and now you try to backpedal. Not gonna happen.. here's what you said and I quote:
"How about a "small infringement lawsuit" against AMAZON where they have an agreement in principle? LOL!
Probably still not enough proof... always moving those goal posts.
Good thing Hudnell and team didn't settle for your little plan suggested below"
You laughed and basically ridiculed the whole idea....
Saying vplm took a different approach and we don't know how my idea would've worked....is more like it but certainly not how you characterized it at 1st.
You then insert all these what it's in and that's nothing more than you attempting to find holes in the idea. Actually, it was a very common sense and logical simple concept. ALL YOUR what ifs, would be true no matter what route they took so they are not the issue. The simple issue is that due to what I spelled out in simple terms for you, but you conveniently ignored, about how so many msg board goers at the time were saying vplm could not endure a fight with these big dog companies and needed to just sell the patents. If you were to look back in the posts, you would find me saying that licencing was the way to go instead but if they insisted in suing, it would make FAR MORE SENSE to sue a small "alleged" infringed that wouldn't be able to bleed vplm dry and had little money to fight back with which hopefully would result in a win which would start the ball rolling in a snowball effect. That is a pretty eloquent idea AFAIC.
And it WAS NOT "Monday morning quarterbacking" as you dismiss it. It's YOU, 10 yrs later, who are doing the MMQ. My idea THEN was current and appropriate to the time.
Lastly your idea about closing off all escape routes is potentially fatally flawed because may enjoy havent been paying much attention, but that depends completely on the patents being all that, while I have said a million times I don't believe they are and that will eventually be shown. So that's a pretty big "escape route" not covered.
boom
More likely, that she just was the emu's pawn....a more than willing one, once she saw the riches it brought her...
And look, it's either a share selling scam or it's not and if it is, I don't see how 5 yrs will bring the ship in. How could it unless it's all for real? The most or best scenario I could see and I wouldn't put it last the Emu....is that some companies might get scared they will have to pay huge damages and so agree to a settlement out of fear. But the reality, it seems, is that they all have told vplm to go pound salt and still say the same. They fight only so they don't lose by default for not fighting back.
Anyway, I gave it another 10 yrs 3 yrs ago so it's now down to 7 but that's how long before it burns out or gets shut down. I've seen it before with TIV.
No that's dumb. How many times must it be explained to you that it doesn't mean anything if they "won" a million IPRs? A favorable IPR outcomes simply and ONLY fends off challengers trying to put an end to vplm's lawsuits. It DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING REPEAT DOES NOT CHANGE A THING! When the IPR trial is over it's still the same patents WITH THE EXACT SAME VALIDITY THEY HAD THE DAY THEY WERE ALLOWED AS PATENTS BY THE USPTO! NO MORE NO LESS. NOTHING HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE PATENTS TO MAKE THEM STRONGER OR BETTER. NO CHANGE!
ITS QUITE AMUSING HOW BACK IN THE DAY WHILE THE PATENT PROCECUTIONS WERE ONGOING.....ALL THE PEEPS HERE THAT KEPT HARANGUING ANY DETRACTORS ABOUT HOW HARD WORKING, THOROUGH AND KNOWLEDGEABLE THE USPTO WORKERS WERE AND HOW THEY DIDNT MISS A TRICK. THEY HAD TO STUDY AND APPROVE EA AND EVERY ATTRIBUTE THE PATENTS CLAIMED TO HAVE AND LEAVE NO STONE UNTURNED. AND YET........NOW.....EVERY TIME A CHALLENGE IS DENIED, YOU AND A BUNCH OF OTHERS THINK THAT ADDS SOMETHING MORE THAT WASNT THERE FROM THE GITGO.
IT DOES NOT.
You don't mean you actually believe vplm will eventually win DO YOU?
Your wrong about that also. 1st of all, if I hadn't tried at all, I would've never got into vplm in the 1st place and long before there was any talk of patents, if I didnt see positive things or what appeared to be anyway. But ever since they handed us 2-3 yrs worth of blatant lies and then 100% reneged on their promised, then I began to see the holes in the story and the doubts began. But I stayed long and loyal for some more time until there were more holes than fabric and the whole story started to come apart for me. It was a long time tho, before I quit that whole "true long" ridiculous mentality and began trading.
I still kept an open mind though but every move that vplm made and every pr kept closing my mind to any good EXCEPT FOR THE INSIDE. I SEE EVERYTHING IS GOOD FOR INSIDE AND THE SUPPORTING CABAL. PERSONAL ATM AND JUST LOOK AT THE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF SHARES THE EMU, WIFE AND OTHER BOD SELL ALMOST EVERY DAY TURNING THIS INTO A JOKE THAT NO ONE WOULD TOUCH ANYMORE EXCEPT THOSE STILL WILLING TO RISK SLOT TO KEEP TRADING SMALL PRICE FLUCTUATIONS.
And those few and far between spikes like yesterday, last for only a few seconds.
The whole crew was found guilty of breach of fiduciary duty and wrongful personal enrichment by a jury of their peers and that was A TRUE CALL! It was no accident.
Your question sounds all convoluted to me. As usual, it tries to take an excellent idea I had and twist it into something else, attempting to make yourself sound smarter.
1st of all, the "demand" element was just purposely adding a little hyperbole to the post. It was rhetorical. But the base idea was a very good one. It was almost 10 yrs ago when I posted it. At the time, I recall many saying that vplm would not be able to afford prolonged pushback from the bigs. And there were arguments as to whether plan A, sell company, or plan B, start suing, or other plans, were the best route. They didn't seem to be getting anywhere. I knew they had named 60 or so alleged infringers and I did some of my own checking and found there were many more than 60 voip service providers out there and the company was saying that all voip service providers were automatically infringers. So with all that in mind, my suggestion was to begin a lawsuit against a small infringer, one that didn't have zillions of dollars to give and that would 1) make it easier, cheaper and quicker to win in court and 2) that would establish that vplm was for real in the infringement suit pursuit and last but not least, it would get the snowball rolling. Once a lower size case was won, that would open Pandora's box and that would make subsequent suits far easier to get thru and win, like dominoes.
There is no way that's not a good plan as far as I can see. And on the other hand, 10 yrs later, not a damn nickel has been won and contrary to the fairy tale being told that everything has gone like roses for vplm since, thats not what I heard many many longs saying as they finally bailed or have been bitching hollering and complaining about esp in the past year. There were many complaints by those who used to totally trust vplm.
So you can try to turn that idea I had 10 yrs ago into sounding like it was foolish but I'd like to hear a telephony patent lawyer state same for back then.
And the stupid, ignorant, highly disingenuous joke of a claim that vplm is in its best position ever is 100% insult to shareholder support and intelligence. The damn truth of the matter is that way back when......almost 20 yrs ago, when the Digi and vplm peeps were friends and beginning to collaborate on voip ideas and technologies, and vplm was close to .40 per share and they were developing a voip service providing platform and business, THEN AND ONLY THEN, WERE THEY TRULY IN THE BEST POSITION EVER AND IF THEY HAD STUCK TO THEIR PLAN AND PROMISE, TODAY THEY PROBABLY WOULD BE IN THE MIDST OF BEING BROKE UP LIKE BELL TELEPHONE WAS, FOR BEING A WORLDWIDE MONOPOLY AND A REAL TRUE LEADER IN COMMUNICATIONS.
There it is again.....as predicted....... another dump after a large or small spike up. Never fails. Normal operating procedure for VPLM. You can count on it always.
Again, it's not important enough to be an issue, but it's you that isn't following the narrative and in already told you b4, that I don't know what your "VI" refers to and I never said it has anything to do with vplm, per se, but I did remind you of the posts you made that prompted me to mention the 3rd possibility which is zero movement. I don't know what it is that you don't get, but it couldnt be any simpler. Without me reposting the quotes from those posts, basically you made light of a vplm poster who predicted the price would go up or down, because that's obviously not much of a prediction. So after you made your remark, I jumped in to light-heartedly make the point that there's always the possibility of zero movement. To which you replied, trying to tell me you were talking about something else, and something about AMC, etc. But that's not the case. If you go back to the original post, it's very obvious that you made fun of the other guys loose prediction and I told you there was the 3rd possibility. I have no idea what makes you think something THAT simple is not the narrative. It's not important but if you want me to post the quote AGAIN, ok. I guarantee you were talking about vplm at the time, because that's what he was referring to. And even if you thought you were talking about some other stock, it's STILL true that there are 3 possibles, not 2. I'm fine with leaving it alone now unless you want to press it.
And once again, not up or down, like last Friday, you know, the thing you denied even talking about? Your laugh seems to deny the possibility of 0% price movement which happens alot and might be due to MM manipulation...? Not trying to give you a hard time, just making the point that there's 3 possible price movements, not 2. That said, I've been able to successfully predict many times when the price will go down, cuz vplm is so predictable, given it's long term history.
So you actually ARE going out on a limb, since any days trading can always wind up being a wash.
Thankyou for that. Admittedly I'm as bad as it gets at deciphering legal lingo. As best I can tell, it just says more info will be forthcoming, is that correct?
Incidentally, for what it's worth, I did try to find that on my own but came up empty handed. Sometimes I know where to look sometimes not sometimes forget. I'm only on a need to know basis anyways...
Apparently nothing good from court today. Answers will prolly stretch out several weeks or months in genuine vplm style. I try to find anything I find to be genuinely positive about vplm but keep coming up empty handed...
Hey noobies..... Yeah, you who some here seem to think you're not smart enough to go thru the pile and do your own level of DD and then discern what's what.....lolol......oh, and that somehow my posts are stopping you from getting up on your soapbox and saying or asking what you will..... hahaha.......(and incidentally, if anyone asks question and no one else has answered it or I disagree with the answer....OF COURSE I'll put up my best shot at providing an answer. After all, been here and studied here for many yrs).
Anyway, if you think it makes sense, the outlandish explanations you find here on a wholesale basis to justify a 23 yr or a 20 yr (under vplm name) or even just a 10 year name (since becoming patent troll) as to why they have never made a nickel and never sold a single licence or never got a single settlement and never have been able to sell the company or the patents..........all I can say is: BRILLIANT!
So obvious it is......
That no one will commit to whether or not they would buy the company or the patents if they had the money. It was an excellent question because if someone says yes they would, then that would beg the question of why none of the companies who could easily afford to do so, have not....
And if their answer was no, then that would obviously bring on well, then why then should the companies?
It's not a matter of simply "having an answer for everything or anything", it's as valid a question can be for the very reasons I just gave in terms of the questions the answers raise. And that is why no one wants to answer it. It may appear a circular thing to some but that's only when viewed from the standpoint of believing the patents are "all that". When viewed from the standpoint of not believing in the patents being "all that", then it's a good question.