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.
So make a prediction.
I believe that within 6 months it will become widely apparent that e.Digital's OEM relationship with DigitalWay provides marginal revenues at best.
Specifically, I am making the prediction that any DW clone of the O1K is
1) non inclusive of the MicroOS
2) any licensing or royalties revenues will be equivalent (revenue to e.Digital, give or take 30%) to those of Classic and B&O.
Semantics and Safe Harbor aside, put your balls on the line and make a prediction.
You enjoy positing hyperbole but when it comes down to nailing you on a prediction, you cower. However you enjoy debunking others who make affirmative statements (myself, Gilgamash, Cassandra, etc.) Perhaps we can change this trend. Either you have conviction behind your statements or not. The time to hedge one's opinion has passed.
We are no longer interested in your opinion, you've been wrong for so, so long. Now is the time to step forward and make an assertion - just as I have above.
Sentinel,
Based on EDIG's and DW's statements I do not think the O1K DW clone will incorporate the MicroOS and therefore the revenue generated to e.Digital will be marginal at best. Most likely along the lines of the revenue generated to e.Digital by the company's relationship with Classic or B&O.
If you carefully read the 12/20/02 letter in conjunction with the 10Q filed for the period ending 12/31/02, my assumption should be self-evident.
This should be the most important feature of the letter to e.Digital investors:
"Our manufacturing partner, Digitalway, Inc. of Korea, is concurrently building feature- differentiated Odyssey 1000 units for their use in Asia."
And then the company goes on to say:
"Through Digitalway and other OEMs we expect this important new product, based on our patented MicroOS™ technology, to be licensed with variable features for sale around the world."
In other words, DigitalWay is building a O1K unit that does not included the MicroOS - is "feature- differentiated".
What a bunch of slick speaking individuals. Changing the inferences as the reader follows along.
Great, thanks. I had the hereunder message all cued up however I retract everything in it.
--------------------
Sentinel,
I am questioning the veracity of your assertions.
One might say I am accusing you of being a liar and demanding that you support your hyperbole with facts.
I do not believe you are required to support your assertions with facts however your refusal to do so calls into question;
1) your ability to do so
2) the veracity of your statements
Put simply, if you can't support your statements with facts when asked to do so, anyone with any modicum of intelligence will consider them irrelevant.
However at this point I am not convinced you are attempting to construct an intelligent argument. No, I think you are blatantly hyping the stock in the hope you can unload your countless thousands of shares on unwitting investors who may buy based on your unsubstantiated comments.
But anyway, you have thousands of messages on countless different message threads and when asked to support your theory you respond with an immature
Interesting and thank you!
If it was 1.3 million units in 2001 and IDC is forecasting 25 million units with revenues of $5 billion in 2003, well, something stinks.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2002/tc20020827_9548.htm
Wow, that is a 1,800% increase over two years.
This is exactly my reason for not making investment decisions on anyone's numbers.
DVD players are the allegedly the fastest growing consumer electronic format in history. However if the numbers cited in the article you posted are correct and IDC is even remotely correct in their forecast, growth in DVD player sales will be dwarfed by the growth in digital audio players however I don't seem to read about the digital audio player industry championing their growth rate like I have read from the DVD market. Further the numbers seem odd because nearly everyone I know owns at least one DVD player however only a few people I know own a digital audio player.
Either way, the numbers don't compute.
Thank you again though for providing an article that flies in the face of the IDC projections. It just goes to show you, I and others that industry sponsored projections and numbers are not to be believed. It's better to look at the fundamental performance of industry leaders in each group (DVD and MP3). The fundamentals of MP3 player companies appear quite poor however those companies focused on exploiting the boom in DVD appear quite rich.
That letter is dated December 20th, 2002.
The most recently filed 10Q is for the period ending December 31st, 2002.
Why wasn't this information disclosed in the SEC filing?
Hmmm, what to trust, what to trust? A letter filed with Business Wire or quarterly financial statement filed with an agency of the Federal government?
Just double checked, nope the following statement is not included in the company's 10Q for the period ending 12/31/02.
"Our manufacturing partner, Digitalway, Inc. of Korea, is concurrently building feature- differentiated Odyssey 1000 units for their use in Asia--where their OEM and branded products are the #1 selling digital audio products--as well as in Europe and North America. Through Digitalway and other OEMs we expect this important new product, based on our patented MicroOS™ technology, to be licensed with variable features for sale around the world. Each licensed unit is expected to display our "Powered by e.Digital Technology" tag line; e.Digital will be credited as the developer and we will receive licensing fees and royalties for each unit sold."
A press release dated 12/20/02 and the 10Q for the period ending 12/31/02, now why might the information contradict itself?
Why might that be? Maybe this is why?
"Through Digitalway and other OEMs we expect this important new product, based on our patented MicroOS™ technology, to be licensed with variable features for sale around the world."
Yet the proceeding statement is:
"Our manufacturing partner, Digitalway, Inc. of Korea, is concurrently building feature- differentiated Odyssey 1000 units for their use in Asia."
Now why the hedging? Maybe DigitalWay isn't going to license the use of the MicroOS and e.Digital is going to receive a pittance for the licensing of the basic reference design? Similar to Classic and B&O?
No, can't be right? RIGHT?
milplease,
Digitalway does not count Gross Sales of the Players as revenue. OEMs like Samsung pay Digitalway not consumers.
Okay but I was referring to DigitalWay's revenues reported in the financial statements on their website.
Are you 100% certain they don't have their own brand?
The Revenue they report is well below the final sale price that is quoted in MP3 player market projections.
This explains why my estimated average sales price per unit was below $10.
Digitalway has done a great job of doing, over the past few years, what e.Digital set out to do.
Agree, DigitalWay embodies what e.Digital endeavored, but failed, to become. Odd that both companies set out to address the market around 1998. It just goes to show you that a good idea is worth little without a management team capable of exploiting the idea.
Now for some reason they are taking our design to Market.
Can you point me to public statement made by DigitalWay or e.Digital that discloses DigitalWay's intent to take a e.Digital design to market? Or is this just another example of dot connecting, or just another example of selective disclosure of material information by e.Digital officers in violation of Regulation FD?
Anyhow, last I checked e.Digital was on the hook for nearly 6 million dollars in product from DigitalWay and has issued a $101,295 letter of credit to DigitalWay who will undoubtedly begin to drawdown on the letter if e.Digital fails to fulfill it's agreement by (EDIT correction: it should read "the initial order date", not March 25th, 2003./EDIT) March 25th 2003.
_________________________________________________________
2) On March 25, 2002, the Company entered into a supply agreement with Digitalway, one of its contract manufacturers, and has agreed in good faith to purchase a minimum of approximately $5.96 million of product in the twelve-month period from initial order date. The Company began to purchase products from Digitalway in the quarter ending December 31, 2002 and has received approximately $136,000 of products through December 31, 2002.
3) The Company maintains a $101,295 facility for an irrevocable letter of credit for products to be purchased from Digitalway.
4) Restricted cash represents the irrevocable letter of credit issued to Digitalway in the amount of $101,295.
e.Digital has said many things over the course of the past few years with only a small percentage of them occurring and an even a smaller percentage of them occurring as originally stated.
DW will be marketing a version of the O1K, and in fact it is the Digitalway HD100. EDIG will get royalties and licensing fees from DW for this. In this respect, DW is an OEM of e.Digital's.
1) Provide the evidence that the HD100 is a DigitalWay design that will generate royalties and licensing fees to e.Digital.
2) Provide the evidence the DigitalWay intends to brind the HD100 to the retail market.
Here is what is reported about DigitalWay from the company's most recent 10Q filing:
1) The Company relies on Maycom Co., Ltd, Musical Electronics, Ltd, Digitalway Co., Ltd., (“Digitalway”) and DGN, Inc. Ltd. for the manufacture and assembly of its MXP 100, TREO 15, Odyssey products and the Silhouette, respectively.
2) On March 25, 2002, the Company entered into a supply agreement with Digitalway, one of its contract manufacturers, and has agreed in good faith to purchase a minimum of approximately $5.96 million of product in the twelve-month period from initial order date. The Company began to purchase products from Digitalway in the quarter ending December 31, 2002 and has received approximately $136,000 of products through December 31, 2002.
3) The Company maintains a $101,295 facility for an irrevocable letter of credit for products to be purchased from Digitalway.
4) Restricted cash represents the irrevocable letter of credit issued to Digitalway in the amount of $101,295.
5) In May 2002, we signed a strategic development agreement with Digitalway Co., Ltd., (“Digitalway”) of Korea. Under the agreement, we will co-develop and market advanced digital audio players for the consumer market. The products will be branded by e.Digital and marketed in the United States and Canada. The products will be branded by Digitalway and marketed in Asia and other territories. The new products developed under the agreement will be also branded by e.Digital and marketed in Europe. On May 31, 2002, we announced the first products resulting from this agreement, the Odyssey 100, Odyssey 200, and Odyssey 300. In July 2002, the products became available for sale. All of these portable MP3 player products use embedded Flash-memory technology with a SmartMedia card expansion slot for optional storage media upgrades. The Odyssey 100 is an extremely compact MP3 player with very efficient power management, providing up to 31 hours of playback time on a single AA Alkaline battery. The Odyssey 200 incorporates an FM tuner and a digital voice recorder. The Odyssey 300 features direct MP3 encoding, allowing users to plug in their personal CD player and encode MP3 files directly to the Odyssey 300 without the use of a computer. It also incorporates a digital voice recorder, FM tuner, and FM recorder. The Odyssey products include software to interface with PC and Mac platforms to organize and upload/download files.
And no offense, but I'll take the calculations of a respected source like Business Week over yours any day of the week.
Well that is certainly odd. I provided my calculations and you thumb your nose however you will accept a unverified number mentioned in a BusinessWeek article. Explains your position as an investor in e.Digital quite well I must say.
How do you know BusinessWeek calculated anything?
BusinessWeek isn't know for their investigative journalism, to the contrary the magazine is known for their reporting of business news.
I imagine the author of the piece did not calculate anything and more likely took DigitalWay for their word. However I reserve the right to be wrong and have submitted a request to the author to clarify how they came to the 20% figure.
The point, as I see it, is that Digitalway is a well known and respected brand worldwide, and EDIG has done well to align themselves with them.
Yeah, if one were to poll 1,000 randomly selected consumers, 33% from Europe, 33% from Asia and 33% from North America, what percentage of the sample would recognize the DigitalWay name?
Perhaps you would be willing to answer an honest question - prior to e.Digital announcing the DigitalWay name in a company press release, were you aware that the company even existed?
Contrary to prudent investment methodologies - you seem to rather easily accept any notion, regardless of it's veracity, that supports your need to affirm the reasons you have invested in this company.
"The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees, in every object, only the traits which favor that theory." --Thomas Jefferson
Good luck and keep on buying!
In Asia including Japan, Korea and China, Digitalway's products are recorded as No.1 selling digital audio products. Worldwide brand market share is reported as 20%. (as of June 2002. Business Week)
It very well may be 20% of the aggregate unit volume however it not conceivable (impossible) for DigitalWay to account for 20% of the aggregate dollar (revenue) volume.
I estimate that the aggregate revenues from digital audio players were probably $1.5 billion in 2001 (this would equate to a 80% annualized compounded increase in reaching the projected $5 billion dollar market in 2003). A 20% market share of a $1.5 billion dollar market is $300 million. However DigitalWay indicates their 2001 annual revenues were $24 million, or 1.6% of my $1.5 billion estimate.
If the market for digital audio players was $1.5 billion in revenues for 2001 and the average selling price per unit was $100 (my estimation based on low Asian selling prices) then the annual turnover was 15 million.
A 20% market share of 15 million aggregate units is 3 million units.
3 million units divided by $24 million in annual sales equates to an average selling price of $8 per unit.
Either way, DigitalWay's 20% market share just doesn't compute on any basis unless their average retail price is around $10-$15 per unit.
You can't address the points, can you?
Nora Jones had the backing of a major record label (a subsidiary of AOL I believe). I define "no name artists" as ones without the backing of a major record label.
The fact of the matter is all of the content on Wedigmusic is free because the artists are not encumbered by contractual obligations with major record labels and choose to disseminate their music for free in an effort to gain publicity.
"There is endless potential here...EDIG is just lacking in the necessary funds to develop it."
There is no potential as evidenced by the record labels sloth-like movement into the space and the burgeoning demand for free pop or sufficiently marketed music.
Even if there was potential, which there isn't, like you said - e.Digital has no money to exploit that potential. So what's the point? Just another unnecessary drain on cash within a discombobulated and tattered business plan. You and I both know the main benefit of the site is in leveraging it's future "potential" into selling stock today. In other words, it gives promoters such as yourself material to work with. It also gives another of Woody's buddies $25,000 upfront and a cushy job doing nothing all day, all paid for by subsidies provided by the shareholders of the corporation. Same with Putnam, Falk, Warden, Ravenel, Ferguson, Anandpura et al.
As long as these parasites living off shareholder subsidies are still around, the company isn't going anywhere, ever. Never has, never will.
Thanks, however I find the market share data on DigitalWay rather unbelievable.
DigitalWay's own financial statements indicate the company generated 28,705,000,000 Korean Won in sales in 2001, down 29% from the prior year. That is about 24,000,000 in United States Dollars.
What was the world-wide market for MP3 players measured in dollars in 2001? I don't no, nor am I about to spend the $3,000 to access the research.
However, here is an article that states the following:
Tech-data tracker IDC has forecast 2003 sales of 25 million portable digital-music players with total revenues of $5 billion..
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2002/tc20020827_9548.htm
Let's do some math here. $5 billion in total sales multiplied by DW's 30% share equals $1.5 billion in sales to DW.
DW's 2001 sales were $24 million. $24 million is 30% of a $80 million dollar industry. Using IDC's 2003 forecast, we are then led to assume the market for digital music players is going to increase 6,150% between 2001 and 2003 or from $80 million to $5 billion.
Either DigitalWay's market share numbers are overly exaggerated or the digital music player market is poised to become the fasting growing market in the history of any market.
Compare this 6,150% growth to the growth in DVD players which is the fastest growing format in consumer electronics history, having grown 60% from 2001 to 2002.
Do you always twist the facts?
"I think the music labels are wrestling with the same problem of trying to develop a business model for online content as is EDIG"[.]
The majority of the record label's expenses pertaining to online music are going to litigating the Kazaa, Napsters et al. and protecting their content.
They haven't done much when it comes to developing a business model simply because any business model they do develop will be entirely unable to compete against free content.
What exactly is e.Digital's "model"? The web site is clearly an expense and currently is absent of sources to generate revenue. What a terrible model for a company with two months of cash left. The bottom line is it was a ludicrous managerial decision and in the context that Jones is an employee of the company even more questionable.
The cost for EDIG to develop a website from the ground floor, without contacts in the music field, would have been significantly larger than issuing shares for an already established format.
Do you know this as a fact? Have you requested a quote on web site development lately? Prices have plummeted as demand for web presence have evaporated and large company's have brought much of their development inhouse; where have you been the last four years. I have friends that design web sites infinitely more professional looking and working than wedigmusic.com for less than $5,000.
Like I said earlier, the funtunality and design of the web site is attrocious however the value is in the library of music. Having said that, the content is nearly all no-name artists who willingly will record their music in mp3 format, provide a biography and submit it to "portals" at no cost.
To summarize, $50,000 for what e.Digital received is ridiculously overvalued. Further, the fact that half of that went to a employee of e.Digital warrants investigating whether the transaction does not breach the legal definition of arm's-length transactions amongst a publicly held company and it's officers and/or directors.
"And, do you have any information as to whether or not those shares were ever sold by the recipients?"
Who cares if they sold or not, bottom line is it was recorded as a $50,000 expense on e.Digital's financial statements.
Please support your assertions with verifiable proof.
Statements from the companies in question are not considered proof.
Proof would come from an independent research firm providing analysis on the MP3 player market.
By the way, neither DigitalWay, PortalPlayer or PortalPlayer's customers have ever released a product using e.Digital's intellectual property.
Lets just say it's nice that the leaders are working with us.
I think your statement would be more appropriately phrased as let's just say it's nice that e.Digital is working with (utilizing) the products and services of the industry leaders.
You're the one saying it has unimaginable yet unrealized potential, I'm the one saying it was a poor use of the company's resources, management overpaid for the assets, management overpaid for the assets from an employee of company.
I've throughly explained my reasoning, the onus is on you to refute my reasoning.
Making statments like "it has great potential", "the market is only now blossoming", etc. is merely hyperbole and rhetoric and refutes nothing.
Their retail business goes hand-in-hand with the manufacturing.
e.Digital has a revolving door business model which includes two versions that have consistently failed.
Around 1994-1996 they were trying to license some technology and reference design.
1996-1998 they tried and failed to successfully manufacture and retail a digital voice recorder using Flash Memory. What they did accomplish however is driving the company into insolvency (sound familiar?) after the failed model successfully gutted the company of any value.
1998-2001 they once again tried to license some proprietary technology and reference designs but even in the midst of the greatest technology spending boom in the history of civilization failed to generate annual revenues over three million dollars and never generated a operating profit (the company never has generated a operating profit over the time it was publicly traded).
2001-2002 they tried and failed to successfully manufacture and retail a digital audio player. However they did successfully drive the company into insolvency and for the most part gutted it of any value.
2003 they are once again trying to license their technology and reference designs.
My dates may be a bit off, but you get the picture.
Peter Lynch, Warren Buffett et al will tell you that qualified and experienced management, as well as a wholly independent board of directors, is the most crucial component in a sucessful investment.
I can't think of one product or service that has successfully sold itself when encumbered by an inept, unethical and selfish management team.
And so it goes..
EDIT
I should add that the one valuable asset of the company, it's one time 100% ownership in JABRA Technologies, was divested for pennies of it's future value through periodic disposition of the asset by management.
The point I am trying to make is the only real good thing the corporation held was disposed by management to focus on the consistently failed revolving-door business model.
/EDIT
I would venture to say that your opinion on my knowledge of the value of the content is likely clueless and the relationship with MP3.com (a banner advertisement for the TREO) does not come close to covering what e.Digital overpaid to a director of the company.
The potential has been imagined and executed, it proved to be a overwhelming failure as evidenced by the company's consecutive quarters of negative gross margins and all but the shuttering of their retail business.
However please don't let the facts get in the way of your imagination and by all means - keep on buying the stock.
Well it is likely that in this environment of out-of-work web designers they could have received a much more professional looking website for 20% of what they paid. Even you would agree that the non-existent aesthetics of the website are abominable. I have seen better work out of high school introductory courses to web design.
However the "value" in the deal was the database of music. Having said that, procuring that database of music is worth no where near $40,000, probably in the range of $5,000 to $10,000. Heck, Falk could have been piecing together the database in his ample, $120,000 per year, spare time.
They overpaid by $20,000-$30,000 and to a director of the company nonetheless.
Time to start researching the legal definition of a arm's-length transaction.
Looks like shareholders were screwed yet again.
Some e.Digital blunders of the past:
Paying Jones and Chadwick $50,000 in common stock (62,500 shares) for the Wedigmusic.com website.
$50,000.00 worth of registered e.Digital stock valued at $0.40;
totaling 125,000 shares. The shares shall be distributed in two
equal portions of 62,5000 shares, with 50% of each distribution
(31,250 shares) registered to Bryan Jones and the other 50% of each
distribution (31,250 shares) registered to Russell Chadwick. The
distributions will be made within 7 business days of the occurrence
of the events listed below:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/886328/000093639202000934/a83384p3exv4w13.txt
When one of the thousands out-of-work, professional web designers in the Southern California area would have probably done the work for half of that and produced a much better site.
http://www.wedigmusic.com
_______________________________________________________________
In September 2001, entering into a three-year fulfillment, storage and freight management agreement with APL Direct Logistics, prepaying $90,000 for inbound and outbound freight management services, $14,000 for initial integration and implementation expenses, providing APL with a $144,724 letter of credit, agreeing to a minimum monthly commitment amount of $46,000 and in June 2002 making a payment of $35,000 to APL Direct Logistics as an additional prepayment for freight management.
We have entered into a three-year fulfillment, storage and freight management agreement with APL Direct Logistics ending on September 30, 2004. As part of this agreement, we provided APL Direct Logistics with a letter of credit amounting to $144,724, we paid $90,000 to APL Direct Logistics as a deposit for inbound and outbound freight management services and we paid APL Direct Logistics $14,000 for initial integration and implementation expenses. Our minimum monthly commitment amount, which includes call center support, is approximately $46,000. Depending on the volume of units shipped, this amount may increase.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/886328/000089155402004055/d50935_10-k.htm
And then one year later, on September 30th, 2002, terminating the contract with APL. Which was followed by APL liquidating $51,922 in e.Digital product, in a sense competing with EDIG, APL drawing down $129,925 of the letter of credit and, even after applying $28,668 in prepaid expenses, still owes APL $78,392.
In September 2002, the Company notified APL that it is terminating the agreement. At September 30, 2002, approximately $51,922 of finished goods inventory was held at APL Direct Logistics’ facilities. In the quarter ending December 31, 2002, APL drew down on $129,925 of the letter of credit and sold the Company’s inventory, with a value of $51,992 to reduce the Company’s obligations to APL. After applying $21,668, the balance in the prepaid freight management at APL, at December 31, 2002, the Company believes that the total amount due to APL is $78,392 and has been recorded as a current liability. Settlement of this liability may be either more or less than the amount recorded in the consolidated financial statements and accordingly may be subject to measurement uncertainty in the near term.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/886328/000116923203001168/d53551_10q.htm
You are correct. $4,400 covers about two weeks of Alfred H. Falk's salary.
What I never quite understood was what Falk was being paid $120,000 to do for the twelve or so months James Collier was running the circus. Twiddle his thumbs? Shred documents?
Has the BoD ever justified paying both a "high priced" CEO and COO when the CEO was essentially marginalized?
That is a $4,400 trade. A pittance.
HiEnergy was a company on my scam stock list. I have played this one like a fine violin - this is one of my better plays in some time as I even made some money on the upside.
>
DJN: =DJ IN THE MONEY: HiEnergy And A Man Named Gurian
(Dow Jones 02/21 10:16:56)
By Carol S. Remond
A Dow Jones Newswires Column
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--HiEnergy Technologies Inc. (HIET) is like a lot of
small companies looking to break into the big time.
It's short on earnings, it pays a lot of bills by issuing new stock and it
carries a "going concern" statement by its auditor.
And the development stage company has big plans. It has developed a
technology called "Atometer" which it says can be used for many things that
have become relevant to all of us today - airport security screening, border
patrol, customs drug and contraband screening and chemical weapons
detection, among other things.
Oh, and a couple of investors have a connection to Philip Gurian, a man who
has pleaded guilty to federal charges that include mail fraud and conspiracy
to commit securities fraud. He awaits sentencing.
And a one-time market maker in the company's stock, Metro Trading Inc., also
has a connection to Gurian. A number of its employees had worked at
Sovereign Equity Management Corp. Sovereign, with Falcon Trading Group Inc.,
are two shuttered brokerage firms in which the federal government alleged
Gurian had a hidden interest and exercised control over trading decisions.
The charges against Gurian came in connection with the "Mob on Wall Street"
case in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Published reports have identified him as a front man for Philip Abramo, a
captain in the Decavalcante organized crime family. Abramo awaits trial on a
series of charges, including murder and conspiracy to commit securities
fraud.
Gurian declined to comment on HiEnergy.
The Gurian connection with the company begins with a person named Rheal
Cote, who, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
at one time controlled almost 10 million shares, or 61% of SLW Enterprises
Inc. As part of a reverse merger through which SLW acquired HiEnergy, Cote
agreed to cancel most of his stock and by late April owned 300,000 shares in
the newly public HiEnergy. SEC filings also show that Cote was issued a
warrant to purchase 150,000 shares of HiEnergy at $1 a share in May 2002.
Attempts to reach Rheal Cote didn't lead anywhere. Except to an address
listed as his in SEC filings. The address is that of a condominium owned by
a woman named Jeannine Gurian. She is Phil Gurian's mother. She didn't
return a telephone call.
Then there is an entity called Benil Finance Ltd., which lists an address in
the Bahamas. Benil at one point controlled 8.6% of SLW, according to SEC
filings. But you can't learn much more about it. For starters, it should be
registered with the Bahamian company registry according to that country's
securities commission. But an official with the commission said it isn't
registered.
Benil's address, listed in an SEC filing, happens to show up in documents in
proceedings brought by Edwin Mishkin, the court appointed trustee in the
bankruptcy of Adler Coleman Clearing Corp. Benil's address is the same as a
number of offshore firms named in the "Mob on Wall Street" case that Gurian
and others allegedly used to fraudulently obtain discounted stock that was
sold into the market for a profit through Falcon and Sovereign.
O.B. Pindling, the lawyer whose office is located at Benil's address in the
Bahamas, declined to comment.
A document in a case brought by the trustee of Adler against Gurian and a
number of Bahamian firms identifies Pindling as a "Bahamian who works for
Gurian". Adler collapsed after the demise of brokerage firm Hanover,
Sterling & Co. and Mishkin filed a number of suits, accusing shortsellers,
including Sovereign, Falcon and Gurian of causing Hanover's failure. No
claim was brought against Pindling in that case.
It's unknown what Benil and Cote's interests in HiEnergy are currently.
Benil Finance has not filed any reporting documentation since its original
ownership filing in March 2002. HiEnergy's vice president Michal Levy
declined to comment on the company's investors.
Back in the United States, one of the market makers in HiEnergy stock late
last year was a firm called Metro Trading Inc., a small Deerfield Beach,
Fla. brokerage which back then wrote a positive report on HiEnergy.
A handful of Metro employees had worked previously at Sovereign, a brokerage
firm which according to federal court and NASD documents, was controlled by
Gurian.
Despite HiEnergy's lack of revenues, Metro Trading's officer Christopher
Tavares gave the company a buy rating and a six-month price target of $3.50
to $4 share last October due to its "highly sought after and breakthrough
bomb-scanning technology."
Florida incorporation documents show that Metro was registered to do
business in Florida in early 2000. Florida Department of State Division of
Corporations documents show two principals for Metro Trading, Tavares and
Greg Vittor.
Greg Vittor is the little brother of Glen Vittor, a man who was indicted
with Gurian and Abramo back in 1999.
Gurian, Abramo, Glen Vittor, Louis Consalvo and Barry Gesser were indicted
in Florida in a 21-count federal indictment including charges of mail fraud,
wire fraud, securities fraud, interference with commerce by extortion,
conspiracy to commit money laundering and witness tampering.
Abramo and his brother-in-law Consalvo were separately indicted in Federal
Court in Manhattan in 2000 on charges including murder and securities fraud.
The two had first pleaded guilty in the Florida case but are fighting to
have their pleas withdrawn. Glen Vittor and Gesser remain defendants in the
Florida case.
Greg Vittor wasn't involved in the Florida "Mob on Wall Street" case in
which his brother is a defendant.
But Greg Vittor was embroiled in a NASD case in 1998.
In that case, the NASD found that Greg, his brother Glen, Sovereign, Falcon,
John Fiero and others took part in a manipulative bear raid against now
defunct brokerage firm Hanover Sterling. NASD documents show that Greg
Vittor in April 1999 settled with regulators. He consented to the finding
that he repeatedly failed to make the required affirmative determination
that certain securities he sold short should be delivered and he was fined
$20,000 and suspended for 30 business days. Gurian's name appears numerous
times as a participant in the bear raid in the NASD's findings about
Hanover's failure. But Gurian wasn't named in the case since he was not a
NASD member.
Earlier in 1995, the NASD had fined and suspended Glen Vittor and Falcon for
failing to complete trades. That time, Gurian was also fined by NASD which
alleged that he participated in and was compensated for trading activities
at Falcon while not properly registered.
Like Gurian, Glen Vittor is now permanently barred from the securities
industry by the NASD. Falcon and Sovereign were expelled from NASD
membership in 1997. NASD documents show that Jeannine Gurian, Phil Gurian's
mother, was one of Falcon's owners.
Greg Vittor's NASD registration shows that he's been working at Metro since
1996. Before that he worked with his brother at Sovereign.
At least two other Sovereign alumni have worked at Metro Trading. NASD
records show that Alfred George Marchetti worked at Metro Trading from
September 1997 until December 2002. Marchetti had worked at Sovereign from
1992 to 1997. Late last year, Craig Summa joined Metro Trading. Summa had
worked at Sovereign from December 1995 to July 1996.
NASD records show that Tavares and Marchetti are presently under
investigation by the NASD. NASD documents show that Tavares is under
investigation for "personal trading in a company('s) stock that a research
report was written on", while Marchetti is being investigated for "alleged
violation" of the affirmative determination rule that guides how market
makers can sell stock short. No action has been taken by the NASD against
either traders.
Back to HiEnergy itself. There are a few things here that investors should
note as well. First, the company had 24 million shares outstanding as of
Dec. 6, 2002. But that doesn't include another 10 million shares that it has
committed to issue because of things like stock options, warrants and
convertible preferred stocks.
HiEnergy's SEC filings show that it is quickly running through cash, having
burned through $1.15 million in the six months ended Oct. 31. HiEnergy had
$1.95 million in cash and equivalents on its books at the end of October.
The company had net losses of almost $2 million for the six months ending
Oct.31 and an accumulated deficit of $5.5 million. Finally, a filing with
the SEC shows that some early shareholders are poised to sell more than 7.7
million shares of HiEnergy into the market. HiEnergy's Levy said an amended
filing with the SEC would be filed "in the next few weeks" to clear the
sale.
The company's stock was recently trading at $1.68 a share.
By Carol S. Remond; Dow Jones News; 201 938 2074; carol.remond@dowjones.com
What Constitutes "False Advertising"?
A: Advertising that is literally false, or that is literally true but likely to confuse consumers.
False advertising is often divided into two categories:
1. advertising that is literally false, and
2. advertising that is literally true, but that is proved to be likely to mislead or confuse consumers.
In cases in category # 2, judges normally do not rely on their own intuitive reactions as to what is likely to mislead or confuse consumers. Instead, they usually want to see objective evidence, often in the form of consumer surveys.
http://www.lawnotes.com/false_advertising.htm#Definition
Well it certainly appears as misleading or false advertising to me.
Note that the mention of ID3 tag support is listed under "Technical Specifications" which infers it is a feature of the actual unit - not the software included with the unit.
I would be livid if I purchased the unit based on the listed specifications only to find out later that the description was intentionally misleading, and when returning the product I was charged a restocking fee.
Any idea if this is a e.Digital player?
techwashere.
Cordless earmuffs (LOL) have peaked, you say?
They've hardly peaked sir, no, they've walked off the e.Digital balance sheet and remain unaccounted for.
http://www.jabra.com/products/FreeSpeak_Bluetooth.htm
I won't address your points until you address my own. It is that easy. You want to slither away from the issues I address and turn them into something else? Then I have no interest in substantiating your rebuttal simply because it does nothing to address the salience of my perspective.
Until you learn the rules of engagement, don't expect others to exhaustively refute the illogicality of your position. However, I will grant you this much: you are wrong.
There are rather simple rules toward argumentation, you happen to have failed to work within any of them.
Further, posting random links without providing explanation on their pertinence to your case only helps to defeat it.
I hope this helps.
But Anyway . . .
I don't engage you because you refuse to address my points. So what's the point? Debates or arguments are not about two individuals speaking on two totally different subjects. You want me to engage you, you address my points first.
Are you aware of how competitive the employment environment at an Intel or Microsoft is?
At these companies timely execution is priority number one, if a division or group consistently falls behind schedule - heads roll immediately. There is no "it's not our fault" or "circumstances beyond our control", there is always someone held accountable.
If Intel or Microsoft miss their guidance they don't dodge accountability by deferring fault. They own up to their short comings and assure investors that they are doing everything in their power to avoid similar circumstances in the future.
They don't make statements such as "the wireless division is managed by a bunch of slouches, don't blame us [top executives] for that".
This is a high intensity environment where only the most efficient and apt engineers and managers can operate.
However e.Digital appears to be this extremely relaxed environment where the bottom line is not the focus, timely execution is not demanded and when failure is the result, blame is deferred onto "extraordinary events beyond our control".
Pathetic and no way to run a business.
e.Digital has been running at an operating loss for thirty-five consecutive quarters and there are no signs of this streak ending anytime soon.
Real companies with a legitimate board of directors would have cleaned house twenty-nine quarters ago. They would have fired the CEO, CFO, COO, Controller, Secretary, et al., they would have gutted the employee base of all unproductive or menial workers (opposed to gutting the company of a promising asset) and they would refocus on the core competency of the company.
The company has been running at a negative operating margin for thirty-five straight quarters. Clearly these aren't the most efficient human beings.
You avoided my point entirely.
The point was the engineers couldn't make a deadline if their jobs depended on it.
They are extremely lucky however that e.Digital is not a business, it is a publicly subsidized hobby shop for Norris, his relatives and his friends.
e.Digital is not about generating a profit or returning value to the shareholders of the company - it never has been. e.Digital is about shareholders (the public) providing a job to engineers and managers who can't hack it in a true business environment, an environment defined as one where after so many quarters of pathetic execution people start losing their jobs.
Further the Odyssey1000 is clearly a derivative design of the IPod and DigitalWay product designs. In a sense, e.Digital hasn't done anything but steal another's design idea and slap their name on the casing.
If, indeed, if what you stated had ANY merit, at all, I would think that a general turnover of senior engineers would have taken place.
Not if they continue to receive a paycheck to tinker with personal preferences.
Further these guys have undoubtedly grown accustom to the e.Digital culture which, as evidenced by the company's terrible performance, is rather relaxed and probably provides for plenty of time to utilize company owned equipment to toy with personal hobbies while getting paid.
The core group of engineers could never hack it in a intense engineering environment at say an Intel, Microsoft or any company focused on generating profits instead of providing a shareholder subsidized hobby shop.
Ratios
Interest Rate Sensitive ETFs
drhunt,
Indeed, presumably e.Digital's "bid" was superior to the "bids" of the other five firms.
Undoubtedly the engineering talent at e.Digital has value to offer.
To bad EDIG has an albatross of a selfish management team focused on gutting and looting company hanging from it's neck.
The engineers receive the opportunity to accumulate some resume builders, the management team receives the opportunity to pay themselves a healthy salary while moving assets off the books of the company and shareholders get a empty, worthless shell.
But Anyway . . .
I am certain they gauged the feasibility of the company to remain operational long enough to complete the design-end of the project.
As to the contract-manufacturing end of the project, there are a plethora of companies that offer similar, if not exact, services.
DABOSS, and what of your tenor in this message?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=778833
PPS $19.312
By: DABOSS $$$$$
25 Jan 2000, 01:10 PM EST Msg. 171889 of 984651
19.312...YOU'VE HAD A BUYING OPPORTUNITY
ALL MORNING !!!
AND YOU ARE HERE !!!
PPS $16.125
By: DABOSS $$$$$
08 Feb 2000, 11:04 AM EST Msg. 206409 of 989449
SUPPLY/DEMAND...AND THE DEMAND WILL ONLY INCREASE WITH WHAT'S IN EDIG'S FUTURE...
STAY FOCUSED !!!
PATENTS, PARTNERS, and GLOBAL MARKETS !!!
AND YOU ARE HERE !!!!
PPS $14.906
By: DABOSS $$$$$
10 Feb 2000, 06:04 PM EST Msg. 209766 of 989449
BASHERS ARE IMPOTENT ON THE EDIG THREAD...
so much crap this last year and all EDIG does is hit HIGHER HIGHS with HIGHER LOWS.
Don't fight the trend.
Interest only increases as more evidence surfaces that EDIG is moving forward towards very lucrative times.
Direct news of EDIG and any one of its partners moving forward with their business plans causes the stock to gap up on tremendous volume.
AND YOU ARE HERE !!!
PPS $11.375
By: DABOSS $$$$$
28 Mar 2000, 10:00 AM EST Msg. 259185 of 989436
EDIG LESSON #1: DON'T BE OUT WHEN NEWS BREAKS...
EDIG GAPPED OPEN FROM ITS NEW HIGH OF 17 TO OPEN UP 7 POINTS HIGHER TO 24...that was only in JANUARY !
News of any deal with industry giants like INTEL, LUCENT, IBM or announcements of contracts with OEMs like Panasonic or Rio, will drive this stock.
You have to be IN and positioned with ENOUGH TO COUNT !
You also have a new board member to be announced and the quickly approaching NASDAQ listing weeks away...a new webpage, which will be ever so enlightening, and analysts currently looking at EDIG, evaluating the potential of these vast markets.
And the probability of an equity partner is very real.
THE RECENT LACK OF NEWS ONLY WILL MAKE THE IMPACT OF THE NEXT ROUND OF NEWS THAT MUCH MORE DRAMATIC !!!
There is NO LACK of INVESTMENT CAPITAL waiting in the wings.
STAY FOCUSED on the PATENTS, PARTNERS, & GLOBAL MARKETS !!!
AND YOU ARE HERE !!!
PPS $8.83
By: DABOSS $$$$$
21 Apr 2000, 05:23 PM EDT Msg. 284603 of 989434
SIGNIFICANT NEWS NEXT WEEK--BUY OR HOLD, BUT WHATEVER YOU DO, don't sell.
EDIG's product pipeline is filling and we will see evidence of this next week as Lanier will begin to distribute the Cquence Mobile product.
They have indicated that a press release will be issued next week, the week of April 24th.
There is a concerted effort on this thread, however feeble, to seperate you from your shares. I realize that a large stake in EDIG is held in long hands, but for those who may be new to EDIG, stay FOCUSED, as there is more to come.
PPS $6.87
By: DABOSS $$$$$
24 May 2000, 09:47 AM EDT Msg. 324869 of 989446
nicehit:
I know what you mean, however, a year or two is not a long time to hold an investment that is "truly an investment" and not just a "play".
EDIG is well ahead of where it was last year and I suspect next year we will be able to say the same thing.
Everything management said was happening in this industry is falling into place and is as large or larger than I believe most imagined just one year ago.
EDIG's entrance into the portable music player industry with LUCENT just a little over a year ago was way ahead of the curve, and although this industry has yet to explode(due to the content issue), it involves more global companies than we first thought, and EDIG seems to be an integral part of the whole thing.
As the music side of the business is about to explode and should take center stage this summer, we can LOOK to the EDIG/INTEL relationship to drive this company next.
These are exciting times and require VISION and patience. All those who exercised those two disciplines last year are in great shape, and all those who do so now will be in great shape next year, as long as management continues to forge business relationships with all the right players, for these markets will grow exponentially.
AND YOU ARE HERE !!!
PPS $5.062
By: DABOSS $$$$$
27 Jul 2000, 10:05 AM EDT Msg. 401178 of 989452
April '99 to January '00 was a nine month wait
to move from one high to the next. During the wait, many did not exercise the patience needed to allow their investment to mature...and MANY DID !!!
It has been 6 months since EDIG hit its late January highs.
And there has yet to be major news out, although it is pending.
I suggest you Stay the Course !
AND YOU ARE HERE !!!
PPS $4.50
By: DABOSS $$$$$
02 Sep 2000, 01:39 AM EDT Msg. 452052 of 989455
JimC1997: sad zack reads from a script...
bash and dash. He supposedly has a strict investment model that limits the downside, but the reality is that it has kept him from realizing the true upside here.
He is so short sighted that he missed both major rallies last year, and, even in light of endless evidence that EDIG's business plan is moving forward, he continues on his path of endless bashing. He does not realize that one year after he recommended a sell at $1.20, we are at $4.50 and climbing.
While he bashes and tries to squeeze a nickle out of this sideways market, the true longs have been adding when appropriate. But that is the curse of the daytrader.
I personally have bought in the 3's and 4's, as early as the last 15 minutes of the close today.
This is a bargain in single digits.
The short sighted perspective misses what is transpiring with this new economy.
We are witnessing a Paradigm shift in technology, due to the digitization of content, and EDIG IS THERE !
Some still don't realize this.
AND YOU ARE HERE !!!
PPS $3.562
By: DABOSS $$$$$
17 Oct 2000, 09:54 AM EDT Msg. 498859 of 989462
(This msg. is a reply to 498819 by youout.)
hype or vision ??? I have seen the future...
You have seen the same, but remain clueless, blinded by the poor timing on your purchase. (which will very likely prove to be a profitable position--and probably a long term capital gain)
Now, what will you do from here, wait to try and break even, and then when you do see the momentum move, buy in at those higher levels as you see EDIG climbing, or establish a new position down here, BEFORE THE FACT ?
This is low...BUY LOW, and maybe you won't be so tired.
What motivated you to buy this company in the first place ?
Are those scenarios still intact ? Are the markets for this field growing and about to decend upon us this holiday season.
Has management not stated news before, during and after the November 9th annual meeting ? Is the company not on more solid financial ground than when you bought ?
If these scenarios no longer hold, then I would leave...but you know better...that is why you are still here.
PPS $2.90
By: DABOSS $$$$$
30 Oct 2000, 10:12 AM EST Msg. 512899 of 989458
Come on MMs...is that the best you can do
on all this aweful news of the CEO establishing his largest position ever in the stock, and three billion dollar OEMs about ready to release news, and a $4 million equity placement finalized just last month...
I would have thought there were more suckers than that.
Who got the great execution at $2.25 ?
PPS $0.425
By: DABOSS $$$$$
08 Jun 2002, 10:13 AM EDT Msg. 986869 of 988173
(This msg. is a reply to 986861 by isoldat77.)
isoldat77--where have you been ? Trading, as in day trading ? Nope. When you BUY LOW in size and have the patience to let the investment mature, you don't have to day trade and sweat out the short term...just be patient while the investment/company continues to mature and buy when you can...especially near the 52 week lows.
Bought a nice big chunk just yesterday, as a matter of fact.
At $.395 you can own a lot of this for a song...if it drops in the short term, I will add more, because this company continues to move forward in spite of market conditions.
PPS will shift again, be certain of that. While the moron patrol trades amongst themselves for that big penny and a half swing trade, I keep adding. I like this company and its long term possibilities. I understand the risk/reward ratio and see EDIG as a nasdaq listed company down the road.
PPS $0.38
By: DABOSS $$$$$
11 Jun 2002, 03:43 PM EDT Msg. 988161 of 988173
Oh no, down a whopping 3.5 cents-COMPUSA,Circuit City, The Good Guys, DGN, B&O, DivX, Fujitsu must all be frightfully concerned...
Sell LOW is the basher's motto...sorry, added more today.
PPS $0.29
By: DABOSS $$$$$
14 Oct 2002, 01:35 PM EDT Msg. 1059173 of 1059216
let's see, 369K shares at .29 = $107,000--Ooooooooo, time to panic ...yeah, right before management will address what it has projected to be a turn around year...and it announces plans for the Odyssey 1000.
PPS $0.285
By: DABOSS $$$$$
18 Oct 2002, 08:28 PM EDT Msg. 1061839 of 1061847
(This msg. is a reply to 1061828 by idigedig.)
idigedig,
The question today is, does one invest in a PPS or a company ?
Management is continuing to build a company.
PPS is depressed because we are in a bear market. There are more products today than ever before, and new markets and partners beyond what we knew of last year, as well as a management team focused on getting the job done.
If you invest only in PPS, then NOW would seem a logical time to enter...at the LOWS, before news from the SHM.
If you invest in a company, then NOW would be a logical time, as EDIG is in THE QUARTER from which it will generate record revenues and launch its Odyssey 1000 product line, which is not currently reflected in the PPS due to the overriding bear market.
So does negative gross margins, expanding losses and accelerating dilution, and therein lies the problem. Of course a management team focused on looting and gutting the corporation doesn't help the cause either.
Oh really!
And exactly what laws prohibit contacting the PR guy of a company for further inquiry on a announcement?
I'll hold your hand on this one darling. There are no laws that prohibit inquiries to a company.
There are laws that prohibit behavior if proven to be harassing in nature.
ha·rass (h-rs, hrs)
tr.v. ha·rassed, ha·rass·ing, ha·rass·es
1. To irritate or torment persistently.
2. To wear out; exhaust.
3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.
There are however federal securities laws that require public companies to:
A. make and keep books, records, and accounts, which, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the issuer;
B. devise and maintain a system of internal accounting controls sufficient to provide reasonable assurances that--
1. transactions are executed in accordance with management's general or specific authorization;
2. transactions are recorded as necessary (I) to permit preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles or any other criteria applicable to such statements, and (II) to maintain accountability for assets;
3. access to assets is permitted only in accordance with management's general or specific authorization; and
4. the recorded accountability for assets is compared with the existing assets at reasonable intervals and appropriate action is taken with respect to any differences; and