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 know very little about this but posted was like a half cent not that long ago & now 7-10 & not everybody is convinced on value of patents as a given thus they would certainly be concerned about daily pos & what about shorters? No?
Thanx. Having a very hard time wrapping my head around all that but I believe I get the gist. Hard to know what to look at or listen to and/or believe. Plus I don't see most of this data anyway. So I depend on the direct posts & from "reading between the lines" from the board, esp here there seems to be a wealth of info posted & links & some very helpful & knowledgeable investors here.
Trying to understand this... So it sounds like such would be a common occurrence, no? And if so, then only so much stock (no pun intended) can be put into the volume numbers, as well as so many other pieces of data we see, especially if we don't have the platforms in place to see all the finer detail. Do I understand correctly?
Plan B? Isn't that licensing? I brought up that question a couple wks ago & could find no agreement or support for that idea. Maybe different plan B?
Are you saying that all the known corruption, unscrupulous manipulation, paid pump & dumps, illegal naked shorting, insider trading, etc etc etc... are all part of the market is always right? Sounds like pretty strange stretch of logic to me. Also sounds like an impossible thing to ever prove or disprove, thus no more than something to provoke comments like one might find in a discussion of politics.
The way I see it... what's the vp cap right now, 60 mil or so? If the patents are what they have been said to be, the value would have to be way more than that even now, unless there was some known reason to think all the patents are not necessarily as good as in the bag and/or that they really don't have the value that's been touted, and they have no other income, so the current value would be kinda artificial, and really would be less, so how is the market right? I think the mkt is about as right as a person at any give time... sometimes right, sometimes wrong & always subject to the ubiquitous manipulations & unsupported fears & beliefs.
Maybe more like a clock that doesn't work... It's still right a coupla times a day...
... and it seems like I should also ask... what of these C2 voip patents? Is there any sort of potential or possibly conflict between those patents & vp?
I think i said...(or meant) "was there any indication, (in the case you cited) of the company's (C2) ability (or inability) to pay infringement lawyers (I assume thats how they eventually won out?) or maybe I misunderstood & it never got that far, but didn't u say the plaintiffs or somebody had to cough it up. I'll try to read over. Maybe I'm confused.
Good move. (the comment section thing). I have also been trying to think of avenues for a little "broadening of the cast" (did I just coin a phrase?). In fact I came to the same idea about the comments sections of whatever appropriate blogs, but hadn't yet found the place. Cool!
Your great work & contributions here, on this subject in particular, is invaluable & way appreciated. This report was very encouraging. Pardon me if I missed any mention about, but in this case, was there any indication as to the company's ability to pay the infringement lawyers or any possible contingency arrangement? Your DD & shares is making this play alot more interesting for me, for one.
Thankyou.. I wrote my argument before I read your above post. It is EXACTLY the point I want to see get really addressed, cuz the IMPLICATIONS are huge, no?
Thx very much 4 the mp3. I only have a handset currently (have a lappy but no more Internet & so far can't get the tether to work). I didn't realize it was avail. as mp3. But what you said is exactly the point that I feel is uber important to know about, for all pre-buyout investors & apparently your thinking is along the same lines. I have seen this question addressed here as a non winable, exercise in futility & my 1st thought was "well, if everything I have heard from this board is true about the enormous value of these patents, then why would any knowledgeable commentor brush aside so quickly as a not gonna happen type thing... when there must be lawyers or firms that would naturally indeed work it on contingency if indeed a real winable thing, because they also see the major potential in their cut, right? And to me that is very important, because if it were true, the comments that suggest the time & cost elements, in a court battle, are not practical & would therefore preclude them from happening in the 1st place, are not necessarily correct. If the infringement angle is not enforceable, as above suggests, then why would anyone pay mega billions? Apparently the big guy agrees, from what you noted he said at CC, or simply lied or misinformed.
Could you please expand a little on "(I still think they have a case)", or link back to where you might've covered at an earlier time.. Are you talking about a strong, winable case for infringement upholding? If so, that's what I'm interested in hearing insight about.
Possibly read your post wrong but I think more likely you read mine wrong.. 1st thing I said was to welcome your opinion (because you had said someth to the effect of: "... If you want my opinion..". 2ndly, I fully agreed with & helped validate your comment about the political aspect, by saying that it's an ever present & unfortunate "nature of the beast". Next, I separated the political from the legal because the legal aspect I spoke to was in terms of the much discussed here points about the possibility or futility of long court battles over patent infringement, that, as opposed to any political back scratching or quid pro quo isms. What I was trying to add to that element, was the idea that if the legal aspect of patent infringement was strongly in favor of vp, then that needed to be confirmed for sure by the legal minds around here, because it's a super important aspect, at this stage & development of vp. So I can't see where a single word I said was in opposition to yours & more importantly nothing even remotely questioning your knowledge of any judge stuff (which you clearly sound on the defensive about). All that said, I can't help but add that being the grandson of a judge does not automatically allow anyone to have deep insight into the inner workings. It sure sounds like that's what you claimed. Still, I was mainly in agreement. Sorry if any words I chose somehow impuned your your knowledge. No intent.
Look at that chart! Good volume... Is that a BATTLE or a FARCE?
Yes, I want anyone's opinion to be heard on these aspects. You brought up the unfortunate political aspect b4 & I guess that is always a consideration in anything of value, for that matter... nature of the beast...but as to the legal/court battles aspect, the way I see it is if the legal legs are indisputable, while this level of potential value is on table, then it's time for the legal minds to speak up on just how strong the legs are or aren't, otherwise big time caution ought be advised to potential buyer or holder's (of stock). If all this is the way it is & the reason for the beat downs (look at that chart, it's like those hammer down games in arcade) then all this bantering about is moot & we should just sit down, shut up & get to back of bus & wait for the big buyout. That kinda sucks & is boring. Hope it happens & hope large stockholders realize it ain't in the bag & not bet the farm. Most likely it ain't going anywhere til a buyout.
Hang on... he's goin thru the Fortune cookies...
Ya know... seems lime there sure must exist still alot of doubt as to the value of the patents, in order for it to be held down this tightly for this long w/continual pos news, lack of sufficient exposure, so I think the gurus here ought to focus very closely on solid possible reasons the patents might not have as much value as touted/hoped for, or if cannot, then work on getting word out beyond this board... It's VERY important to look for any scenarios that could validate overlooked possible lack or less value than has been touted. Such info could help protect shares buyers in the interim or if no such scenarios can be shown (strong ones) then it would help to stop it from being held down like this for so long & allow for some price growth and/or profit taking, btawthdik?
I thought someone might ask so I saved the link, but then I said nahhh, they must already be aware cuz so easy to Google voip-pal w/wsj, so I deleted, then I saw comments here apparently hoping for same, so..
http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130903-908016.html
The MG pr was in the WSJ
Ok, I think I get it now. The suggestion is that big players have what it takes, I guess, to work both sides to the point of driving price down & make $, while all wait for a buyout or some other big news. Not sure I understand exactly how they do that, but if it's legal, then to be expected by the sharks, while everyone waits. And if this is the case, pretty annoying to any regular stockholders & day traders who might want to see some profits sooner than stay long. But it seems this scenario would drive some of them to do some shorting in the interim. It's really tough to watch it stagnate or keep being pounced down.
Thx
But the question was, to what purpose, would you think they do so?
I think it's naive to think the co could care less about the pps, in terms of buyout. A pps of $1 or more would seemingly impress & garner higher buyout offers than 7 vent, imho.
Well said. Would you care to add, to what end...you see the manipulation, if it is a different reason than I have suggested?
Couldn't it be that the price is kept down in order to allow for a lower purchase price?
A look at the history of stocks in general, but esp penny stocks, would bear out that it's often...... NOT as simple e as that..
Yeah, but the pps isn't... as it certainly would be expected to, what with ALL the players & pieces fitting so nicely into place, so steadily & promising, plus all the touted massive value of patents AND such an apparent then, huge investor opportunity presented... yet it goes nowhere, day after day, week after week, month after month. It tries but can't. I call some sort of collusion. And for anyone to say all is hunky dory & no worries, doesn't seem fully justifiable.
Oh come on... after yesterday's continuation of positive news & the ensuing biggest price rise in quite a while, it should be obvious..
I THINK it can... I THINK it can... I THINK it can!.. I THINK IT CAN!!
(feel free to join in... ; -)
Also if you look at #'s 6432, 40, 44 & 46 (I think I got this #'s right?) you can see they don't jive right at all & 46 is the one attributed to me but meant you. And it sure does sound like you expressed problems w/mngmt, but I was only referencing who made the post. Perhaps decaf in order.. ; )
I believe I do have my facts straight. Someone replied to me about a post that was clearly made by you, not me. I replied & explained to that person that something was wrong w/the replies because I had not said what he referenced or quoted about some problem w/mngmt & that I had recently seen a couple other mixed up replies as well. He responded that he could see that it got mixed up & confirmed it was your post he was replying to, not mine. Further, it seemed clear to him that you had expressed some kind of problem w/mngmt. And I did not say that you said that there was something wrong w/mgmt, I said that you had some problem w/mgmt, just to provide reference for who said what. And you post (several now that I have seen, does clearly seem to say you have problems w/mgmt. You said you didn't trust them, etc..) but again all I did was reference it was your posting not mine.
Mr spec... I hear what your saying. The sense I get, various things about this stock considered, is not cause for alarm, but a cause for "concern" is more prudent than having none... the main reason being that it was one of the most significant drops in both percentage & to the level it dropped to, at a time when it just seems it has enuff going for it, to not really expect it, AL least not in my very limited knowledge level. Some others, here on the board, with experience & knowledgeable also are a bit aggro over the seeming stubbornness the stock is exhibiting. After all, stagnation & then big dips w/o obvious cause, on the heels of more than tremendous potential news on patents progress & mngmt super upgrades, are fair reasons I think, to warrant a natural concern, at least to know why. But agreed it not necessarily that big a deal in itself, however, by your own gauge & measure, the nature of a pennystock, in general, is more volatile inherently, thus maybe an investor cannot trust it's stability as much as a big dog. Your point about magnified swing effect w/low relative shareholder numbers, is well taken, but that could also mean the swings are more potentially potent. Also where is the official number of stockholders? I saw a much lower # somewhere recently but not sure where..
In reading your post i tried to figure out what you thought then, was the explanation for the 10% drop, but I couldn't...however I do know this much..... you need to be a good doctor...to have a lot of "patients" & in order to wait for the doctor, you have to have a lot of "patience" & in order to make.some $$ here, you'vs gotta have a lotta "patents"..
I didn't say anyth about losing faith in management. Your post says "re: to nyt" but it was someone else who said that. I think there might be someth wrong w/the posting software because I started noticing yest or day b4, where the several replies are toothed wrong person. In one case yest (I can find it later & post if possible... the correct post # was replied to but the post at that # was diff than diff or changed from who it was from originally & these instances involved my posts. So something ain't right. The names, post #'s & posts are mixed up for sure. Not good. The guy who had a problem w/mngmt was JC RI & I responded to him that mngmt seemed ok to me & now it appears that your response to my alias but your comments mix up my comments & his.
Thanks for your "advice" to sell (although I feel it's bad policy to advise stockholders to buy or sell, as that's something left best to them only) but I said nothing so drastic as selling out, only the simple notion that 10 drop is significant esp given all the qualifiers I gave to validate the point. And I think there's plenty of shares available for you if you want more. For me, selling doesn't make much sense.
Well they seem to be forthcoming w/pos news & developments & don't seem to hype lately & from what I gather from CC, they're on track towards the plan & the top guys reps very positive in preceding them which holds weight & garners respect from prospective investors... so where's their downside?
Uhhh... if your not sure you wanna ask me, then I won't burden you with an answer. My points are valid & 10% of anything is significant rather than near meaningless.
Thanks. I guess my point is that regardless of the size or volatility of a stock, or anyth for that matter, 10% is a significant chunk, especially to lose in 1 day. Maybe another way to put is that 10% swings are relatively unusual in a day. But especially w/the myriad of seeming positive news & patents etc. Also, ppl say low volume & no sell-offs happening... make 10% seem strange hence significant. And since you never know if drops will continue next days, and if you hold significant shares, then the feeling in gut is bigger at 10% than 5 or 2 or 1 as well. And if not mistaken I think it's been a while since it dropped that low.
I don't think that's a fair way to characterize it. 10% is a big deal on any stock, no? How does a stock drop 10% in a few hrs w/o a sell off somewhere?
I don't understand.. How do mm make stock go down near 10% in a few hrs?
Between whom?... and what is the mobile invite referenced?
Feel free to correct me but imho, a near 10% drop in any stock in 1 aft, is NOT not a big deal & I would also wonder how light trading results in a near 10% drop. Wouldn't that indicate a pretty sizable sell-off?