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.
Thank you for your professional approach. I appreciate it. I agree with everything that you have stated. I welcome everyone’s opinion.
When you can follow along with the conversation and logically build on it, I will then interact with you further. At this point you have not much more constructive conversation to add. I am not going to get into name calling and some keyboard tough guy dance with you. We can end this by Paulness labeling his opinions as JMO. We then no longer have any beef. Simple. Do that and this whole thing is settled. If not. I will challenge his claims if he continues to represents them as fact. Simple. Do you understand?
I agree. My issue is that I have done research and I find his opinions extremely offensive towards logic itself. His opinions are groundless and filled with so much conjecture. It bothers me that someone can speak such unfounded opinion as fact and no one else challenges it. Why don’t you? Your last statement clearly underlines that you do not agree with some of his claims. Logically it is not possible that you agree with all his statements unless what you wrote me you do not believe. I am confused why you protect Paulness and not urge him to prove his sources to his claims. Your statement itself indicates that such functionality claims of how the roadside device will function cannot exist as the technology is under development.
Here is what is going to go down. You are going to continue to interact with me and the only thing that will result is it becoming apparent just how many holes your arguments have along with his. Let’s continue. This is child’s play.
Interesting. As you meant to write this post directed at me you just involuntarily wrote a statement that basically tells Paulness that he should stop spewing his functionality claims since the technology is in a developmental stage and there is no way that he could know what he spits as fact. Thank you very much! You have been a great help and I will always repost you as quote!
ptcgolf Member Level Monday, 05/18/15 05:13:19 PM
Re: Illumin8edSurfer post# 6828
Post # of 6833
Seems like you have some personal issues...you can get help for those. This a development stage company, the development is ongoing(that means it is changing). The best way to get the answers you seek is to pose your questions to the company. That way you don't have to have a temper tantrum on the board because someone wont do your work for you.
Listen here. I do like what vantage is looking to do with the medical cancer detection. What I do not like is someone speaking as if they are heading up the design of the unit. What gives him the authority to describe the devices function as if it is gospel? Then to have you deflect questions that would pose challenging when he has to back up his claims with sources. What is your agenda? I want facts. I want to separate fact from opinion. It sure looks to me like much opinion is being masqueraded as fact. Prove me wrong and I will bow to you and anyone else that says my words are crap! I will make a statement that I severely apologies to the board for not doing my DD and that I am flat out wrong and thank the board for straitening me out!!!! Prove me wrong! Otherwise look the other way and continue believing whatever dream you have been sold and stick to your opinions and I will continue to ask good questions and you can continue to be annoyed with them.
Oh ya? So how is the non-medical side going to exactly save you? Interesting how VNTH investors feel that the cannabis detection market is a easy low hanging fruit to grab that will save the company from breaking into the very difficult medical market.
What is further interesting is Paulness explaining how this unit is going to function for Police. He describes the unit as if he is involved with beta testing. I have not been able to find one document that explains the function details of the cannabis detection unit that Paulness is describing. How can he even conclude that the medical and police variants will be the same in function? A medical office is a different environment vs. roadside testing. You guys really think the sensor package design and functions will be exactly the same per market?
Didn't VNTH just recently announce that the board agreed to begin exploring cannabis detection? Have there been any news releases that state that they have a cannabis working prototype or are testing a prototype. Do they have a laid out plan that outlines the R&D, prototype development, internal trials and third party testing?
Could you elaborate on the advantage please? I really would like to understand the advantage that VNTH is able to leverage. Please source your facts. Thank you.
Very cool, I forgot the show is tomorrow! Crept up pretty quick.
LOL my avg. is much higher than your entry. Long and strong.
Good stuff. Thank you for sharing. These types of posts are just as helpful as opinions on the company, management and news. I for one welcome more of these types of analysis posts by the senior traders.
I whole heartedly agree Matrix7. Long and strong for a long time! Anyone providing any loans? I sure could use another big stack to invest into BLOZF asap!
Yes, positive results from internal testing will be great. This news should come on the heels of the beta being sent off to third party testing. I agree that this is the news that we all are waiting for.
We have. The Denver show was a media let down. I am not expecting much but being wrong will be great in this case.
I am not sure what you are trying to say. Honestly.
I agree with your sentiments. That is their job. To find the loopholes and when it comes to prosecution data collection. Any loose ends will be exploited.
I feel that they announced that they will investigate cannabis detection but it doesn't mean that the device will function like the medical variant. People are assuming way too much when they opinionate how the roadside procedure will pan out. If they release it as is then they are brain dead. I for one do not think they are and they will reals a different package for police use.
As far as the other details that you speak of. Yes that is all problematic that I am not even getting into. The design issues are issue enough to cause major hurdles if not corrected.
This is a normal growing pain that any company can face. So many companies out there it is easy to make this mistake.
data transmission process...lawyers will have a field day.
I feel the same. For some reason the media is in some type of choke hold. Denver was a media let down.
It will. Their legal loop hole is toast.
Since we cannot determine who is a safe driver and who is not since THC is psycho active and set and setting, strain, experience, and tolerance are all factors means they will most likely result to a zero tolerance position when it comes to driving. If there is a possibility that one person could be a risk due to THC intoxication, there will need to be blanket law. If they cannot decide, which logically I do not see it a possibility, we will have zero tolerance blanket law. Just my opinion.
However, in order for this to occur, there must be evidence of the relationship between THC breath concentrations and accident risk. At this point, there isn’t any, and the largest US study on THC and crash risk found that there is no increased crash risk for drivers testing positive for THC. Without establishing a correlation between THC breath concentration and accident risk, a THC breath test lacks the ability to independently determine who is a dangerous driver.
Here is my take on it. Personal. My opinion is that Cannabis is psycho active. Becasue it is psycho active you moraly can not put a limit level on it since everyone reacts differently. Set and setting can have a shift in outcome. As can to changing strains from one strain to another. With that said I believe that it will be argued that eventual that all states will have a zero tollerence to driving on Cannabis. If you took cannabis two hours before driving then do not drive until the window of time has passed. It may or may not go this way but this is how I feel.
It is a possibility but judging from the last two situations in which it could have dropped into the teens it didn't, support was found. I think we should not see below .25 ever. If it does then that is just an incredible opportunity. Granted I am speaking as if everything is on point as it is now.
If Big P apologizes.
I think what we are seeing here folks is the first political/media use of the cannabix breathalyzer to help pave the way for legalization. Florida is undergoing internal cannabis legalization debate. I see this news clip as a socializeing tool to help inform the Florida decision makers that if Cannabis is regulated there is technology on it's way to bring order and control to a substance that is currently unchecked.
Can you show me documents showing and stating that the vantage sensor detects and indicates the percentage levels of THC from the breath sample in instantaneous real time?
Vantage sensor is far superior it can tell the percent of THC, we have nothing to worry about with BLOZF sensor ,they still need to get a blood test ,and by the time they give one the THCs are almost gone
So what is this BIG news? I'm going to find you man! You can't come in here touting your trumpet and leave us hanging!
Does this mean that we have a completed Beta that isn't announced yet or is the 7,500,000 for a completed alpha?
During the month of April 2014 the Company issued common shares in relation to
production/delivery of a prototype (breathalyzer) to the Company. A 7,500,000 common
share milestone payment was paid to Cannabix Breathalyzer Inc. (a private company) as
outlined in the June 5, 2014 Patent Licence Agreement between the Company and
Cannabix Breathalyzer Inc.
No it is not fear of the competition. If I felt a threat I would invest into the competition. That is what is so great about investing. You can invest into many companies. I do not need to be a fanboy. I can play my ps4 and whatever other system that I choose. I am a big boy. LOL.
Police are very smart and they use laptops now.... lol. That has what to do with any of my points. They have had laptops for decades now. You fail to understand that people will make decisions based on information that exists on past record. Past record shows that pairing devices lose connections and can become problematic. Realize that in order to combat that issue someone will chose a product that doesn't even have that possibility. The fact is that currently Vantage does not have a product that is geared towards road side testing. It is not a platform that is designed for roadside police field use. Can they design a package that is more roadside police friendly? YES. Do they have it now? No. This is based on police opinion. Not based on investors that have the white knuckle grip of death poised on hope.
Why do I keep coming back and talking about VNTH? Frankly bc your logic is so poor that I cannot help myself but to come and point out how poor your logic is. It really is pitiful when you try to rationalize your arguments. They are baseless and are deeply rooted in blind agenda or fear.
Shell just to rehash what you shared once before. Can the 7.5m shares represent possibly something other than reaching the milestone payment for a working prototype?
Best of luck.
You keep sitting on this board and bashing BLOZF. You do not realize that sometimes it is better to be a one trick pony and do it right the whole way through than doing a bunch of things half ass. When it comes to roadside cannabis detection Vantage doesn't have a complete package ready imo to be a serious competitor.
I think VNTH will need to create a one package design if they want to seriously compete against Cannabix within the "Police" roadside breathalyzer market for Cannabis and narcotics detection. I will point out that I would always pick a fully encased solution over a solution that incorporates two independent electronics operating on independent power sources and communicating through a paired process like bluetooth. There are many errors that can result from that design. Just on that merit alone any intelligent department head will choose a less error prone solution for their personnel. Especially when you are talking about administering a test roadside in a stressful environment. Currently the 7 minute traffic stop is being scrutinized more than ever. New case president. They need tough bullet proof technology. Not sensors that pair to a 100 different smart devices and raise pairing connectivity issues. Lawyers will have a field day with this design and bean counters will not invest money into this device for their department because of the legal issue possibilities when better designs exist.
The one trick pony argument is full of holes. It is very weak. You cannot bash a company for developing a product that does its intended purpose but talk poorly of it because it doesn't do more. That is wacky logic. BLOZF is not trying to get into the Vantage side of things. Judge BLOZF for what it is geared to accomplish.
I think VNTH will need to create a one package design if they want to seriously compete against Cannabix within the "Police" roadside breathalyzer market for Cannabis and narcotics detection. I will point out that I would always pick a fully encased solution over a solution that incorporates two independent electronics operating on independent power sources and communicating through a paired process. There are many errors that can result from that design. Just on that merit alone any intelligent department head will choose a less error prone solution for their personel. Especially when you are talking about administering a test roadside in a stressful environment. Currently the 7 minute traffic stop is being scrutinized more than ever. New case president. They need tough bullet proof technology. Not sensors that pair to a 100 different smart devices and raise pairing connectivity issues.
I am interested in the medical applications of the technology. I think that sounds great. The breathalyzer roadside portion I have issue with. More so with the possible issues that litigators would exploit with the open circuit design.
1. I hope this isn't the case. However I speculate that they chose for their device to pair with smart devices to cut costs down. By using the smart devices functionality to serve for the tasks that the sensor doesn’t do on its own. This could allow for them to market the sensor as a more cost effective solution by stating that the sensor can pair with any smart device. This is where I see issues stemming from if they go this route.
2. Yes the police have a PC in the car. So now you are going to have this company provide new software to be installed in all police cruisers? That could be a lot of leg work per each department outfit. Tougher sell against breathalyzers that could be bundled in one complete package.
3. In terms of pairing with smart devices. If I am looking at new technology for my department I do want to choose a solution with the least possibilities of administrative error. The probable possibility of my personal dealing with a sensor that isn’t pairing with a smart device is a problem for me. I know that I need a solution that works within the 7 minutes that I have to administer my testing and convert an arrest.
Now if this breath detection for police work is a distant objective then I am more willing to just discuss the medical side of the device. I think that side is most promissing for VNTH.
I have been looking at this company. Any company that will be getting into the cannabis breathalyzer race. I see a problem. The company is pairing their device with a smart device. This is a problem. This can be a major issue if and when a ruling stands in court that a roadside data collecting device has to function as a closed circuit device to uphold data integrity for field data collecting purposes.
A secondary issue will be department issued equipment vs personal equipment in relation to data integrity. Departments may not want the burden of purchasing a smart device to work along with the device sensor if officers are not allowed to pair their own personal smart device to keep data integrity. A police officer may not be allowed to use their own smart device as a data collection tool that will be used in a court case as it can be argued that the device needs to be neutral and not resemble a conflict of interest by belonging to the officer as a personal smart device. If the smart device is a personal device for the officer, it can be challenged as conflict of interest. A smart device is different than other equipment as it is digital and can manipulate digital data.
A third legal issue will be data transmission. How will the data be transmitted to the smart device from the sensor? How secure will the data collection be? How will the data be stored once it is on the smart device? It can be argued that a wireless transmission may not be secure enough. Next it will be argued that the data integrity of the smart device is an issue. Will it be encrypted? How tamper proof will it be? Who will protect the data from tampering? Will backup data be stored on the cloud? How will that data be transmitted to the cloud securely and stored securely?
Thirdly department bean counters may not like the design of an open circuit design that needs to be paired with a smart device for cost issues. Cost issues being equipment cost and the possibility of legal costs. There seems to be a lot of ways lawyers can attack this device under its current design.
Vantage mHealthcare Inc., through its majority shareholder Nanobeak, is working with NASA, to develop a mobile app, to be used in connection with its Vantage Sensor that will enable law enforcement to screen for marijuana use and deliver in-the-moment results to the officer’s smartphone, tablet or laptop in the field
Shell is going to unleash some serious DD!!!!!!!
Very nice. I didn't catch wind until over .30 but when she is trading over a few dollars the .30 entry point will look just as wise. :)
I wish I wasn't a rookie and had more investment capital. :( At the very least I am on the train fully loaded. :) It would be nice gobbling up much more on the dips. Have fun chomping them up!
Great point, please let me know also so I can do my DD on those companies. Thank you.
-will the sp survive the months ahead where there will be no milestones (news) to be reported?
Exactly lucky. Now my last post was I guess a bit aggressive. It was deleted. Cannabix's legal team would be all over such a pr, company email. It stinks of toilet water this post and completely out of Cannabix character. No way did they point towards a speculative sp, and or insight into sell off interests. Unless you can state the source do not post this wild find.