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.
History seems to repeat and repeat and repeat and... Sometimes it's good to step way back and look at the big picture. Some things to ponder:
1. Coincidence? Yet another "major" PR gets released in another tumultuous race to the bottom (what do you really think of companies and people that act that way?)
2. A "partner" who hasn't updated its website in 2 years. When emailed, a guy writes back that says there are lots of "deals" that he can't talk about.
3. A "partner" that nobody had really heard of.
4. How many times has this dynamic been operative with this stock: bloody massacre followed by non-detailed PRs that still leave total confusion regarding a) contractual obligations, b) revenue potential, c)timeframe etc.
5. Eager beavers declaring victory as intensive Google searches yield a harvest of good tidings (Partners list includes Google, etc etc (hopefully there are enough folks who see those lists for what they are in the world of bb stocks: the people who don't make us pay cash up front to purchase their services).
6. The balance sheet remains toxic. Any PR that doesn't mention something specific about how to remedy this (i.e. Revenues with margins leading to net income becoming retained earnings to quench the flames that are NEOM's liabilities) is just more "hope" in the storm. Other companies can get away with this stuff. Hasn't NEOM overplayed that card?
It's kind of funny that the same cast of characters who drank the Koolaid on this stock are still here, having lost lots and lots of money, and yet still post with that confident "knowing" tone. Victory is always just around the corner. Today's victory will be NEOM's skyrocketing by 1/2 penny to hold and maybe even improve on $.065 / share.
PR Rule #1: Don't mention Microsoft and "Carphone Warehouse" in the same sentence. It's like telling a prospective employer that your past responsibilities included CFO'ing and reordering the staples.
Yes, one of the breaths of fresh air about this company: minimal exposure to Cornell and a capital structure unpolluted by all of that lethal preferred crack-cocaine that hooks owners and screws the common holders.
Finally, the illusion of multiple sources for TXP talk (RB and now, IHub). I'd imagine we're all the same folks on either board, but I do like it...
Cabbie, that's the mil$ question, isn't it? My only point is that the market's perception of the overall market cap will dictate the share price. Was the market figuring that those were the types of acquisitions that were expected when it was valuing NEOM at $200mil with 4-500mil (approx. on avg) shares outstanding? In other words, was that type of acquistion activity already built into the stock price? If it was, or was partially, then the share price would have to drop when an understanding of probable shares outstanding doubles (share price would logically drop by half, all things being equal).
Well, how much do people think the company is worth? If you think, even with all its risks, it's worth $200mil then the share price should approach $0.15 over time as the 1.3bil shares outstanding materializes. In my opinion, the market has generous faith in valuing the company at approx. $200mil. I figure that those types of acquistions were a factor in the market's faith (they confirmed the value; didn't increase it).
Even at $0.20/sh, (assuming the min. 1.3bn to be out) there's a lot of generosity here: market cap of $260mil.
Claw, that's true, but I just can't see anyone (including me) being able to do it. And I'm not just talking naked shorting. I don't think anyone here would even be able to short penny stocks against their long positions.
Accusing stock board posters of shorting is, I believe, just so much "noise", on par with talk about Market Maker manipulation.
Woogs, are you intentionally misleading? Your calc. of the $1.3bil forgot to take into account the 600mil that are already live and outstanding. You throw around terms and #s with such disregard, my past impression of you is being confirmed: you just may be intentionally disingenuous.
The items you have outlined are not all included in the 1.3bil that will very reasonably and understandably be outstanding over the coming months.
1.3bil = 600mil (out now) + 700mil to satisfy CURRENT obligations.
I've wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt but you are making that difficult.
And, as an aside, who the heck on this board actually has the ability, even if they wanted to, to short a twenty-five cent stock?!? For my part, the rep at Scottrade would diplomatically deny the request through his repressed laughter on the other end of the phone! It's been my experience that, conspiracy theories are always wrong (for good or for ill: "He's a short, trying to drive the price down" and "The additional shares are to protect themselves against the advances of MSFT or GOOG or Exxon or the World Bank, or...")
Re-read my post Woogsy. What is the specific point of your disagreement? Current outstanding: approx. 600mil. Current obligation to "partners" 1.3bil.
Or, maybe, your "little bird" has secretly whispered, "You've made up you mind Woog; don't let anyone try to confuse you with facts..."
It's all about market cap. And by that standard, neom is probably valued higher (on a foward-looking basis) than any time over the past year. The "market" doesn't pay as much attention to shares issued solely, but it figures that number plus the probable additional shares to be registered out of the authorized pool. Figure that the market was basing its overall valuation on some number between 500mil and 1bil shares (even though the average outstanding shares was only in the 400bil+ range).
Well, now the market figures there's going to be at least 1.3bil outstanding (I believe this is the number necessary to satisfy its current obligations to acquisitions and Cornell). The market cap at 1.3bil shares is $312mil (@ .24/sh). That's richer than previously.
But this also speaks to the fact that that might be too rich at this point in time, forcing the share price down further, to align itself with more recent valuations in the $200mil range (implies a share price of $0.15 with an expected $1.3bil shares outstanding).
But who really knows, right?
That's funny, inforit1. Wooger is TS. That's good. Wooger is by far the most shameless of pumpsters in Neomworld. I remember several months ago some guys on this board sent a message to some blog, repeating excitedly the latest rumor that GOOG was interested in our little neom. These same posters let the board know what they had done in "getting the word out".
Well, that evening I'm reading some unrelated Raging Bull stock board (not neom, I forget which one). And lo and behold, I see a post from Wooger urging the board to take a look at neom; word is out that GOOG is buying them out. What's more, he posts the URL of the blog, showing the comments of the investorshub posters gossip (notice he didn't point directly to the gossip on the investorsweb site)!
That clinched it in my mind regarding Wooger's integrity. Until then, I always thought he was simply the hopeless optimist. Shame.
Claw, it's the more probable bet (literally): The machinations of Cornell financing are such that, more times than not (and that's very important to a disinterested trader), the share price will fall. Toxicity is present in that Cornell makes money regardless, and as the price falls, it increases downward momentum since a reduced share price necessitates the creation of more shares to satisfy the Cornell contract. As more and more shares are sold, the price falls more and more, necessitating the creation of more shares, etc.
That is the extreme case. NEOM's shares are not even close to this type of end-game. And NEOM has a degree of substance and could only grow by dealing with the unsavory Cornell. It is likely that NEOM will satisfy its present obligations and refrain from additional indebtedness (many companies actually make it a point in highly celebrated PRs announcing their disassociation with Cornell). I'm sure NEOM looks forward to that day.
I would view it as a death-knell if, by now, NEOM had to become increasingly indebted (beyond the heavy price it is now paying for past financing) to Cornell.
Cabbie, who can really say. I used to be gung-ho. My issue has always been the implications of having Cornell in this deal. Those shares are nothing but a loss to shareholders. As to needing more shares to buy more stuff, well, if they buy good stuff then it could be ok, right?
I've turned luke-warm/coolish in the wake of so much press around this up and coming marketing space, with nary a mention of the very company that I was sure would be the gate keeper. Largely (if not completely) ignored, NEOM's hope (I suppose) is in its patent portfolio. All I do know is that there has never been a ruling on the patent issue, that a lot of other well-known companies are getting press in what's supposed to be NEOM's space and that, with a massive overhang of shares, it becomes increasing unrealistic to value the shares at the astronomical figures we might have assumed would accompany some substantive confirmation of NEOM's place in the mobile market. I could rationalize an increase to a couple of $$/sh with 600mil outstanding. But billions? (this is where some will be tempted to say that this is a poison pill of sorts to prevent takeover, blah blah blah. That's just wishful thinking, imo).
Alas, I'd be surprised at this point to find that any serious company (msft, goog, etc) has ever cast anything but a very small disinterested glance in NEOM's direction.
But I'd like to be wrong. My experience with this company so far doesn't bear that out though.
JP, gotta love it. You send out a letter filled with a combination of naivete, grovelling and child-like sincerity (said Cindy-loo-hoo, "oh, please Mr. Santa Clause, do tell, where are you taking our Christmas Tree...").
It's really kind of funny:
JP: "Please stop the dilution. And let us know why the dilution has to be, well, so excessive. I mean you've increased the shares from 100mil to 1bil!!"
Response (2 weeks later in the midst of CTIA): "Oh yeah, well here's another 4bil for your whining!"
They need 5 billion shares for the reasons stated in the filing (the tangential theories expressed on this board are just so much wishful gas):
1. They are contractually obligated to Cornell. They will be in default if they don't quickly turn on the press and register shares.
2. They need to fulfill their obligations to the recent acquisition targets.
3. They want to purchase more companies and need shares to do it.
For anyone who wants to struggle through this correspondence, a key issue surfaces which (to the corresponding "commentator") is pivotal; that is, the necessity for neom's relationships with the SPs (the guy, my friend, is in the start-up mode for his own company, has lots of interest (and wannabe committed funds by big players), and has plans for revenue streams in the same space as neom. Hence, his continuous reference to his own business):
HE WRITES:
Yes - The application would be big if they can get the carriers, Verizon Cingular etc to embed the software in the phones on thier network. However a Verizon could build ther own solution with Google or Microsoft and make it uneconomical for Neomedia to defend thier patent. The problem with software based internet solutions is sort of like the Vonage problem - if let say Verizon see a large loss of paying POTS line service to Vonnage which is travelling over thier DSL lines - it is a no brainer Verizon would be highly motivated to degrade the service and offer their own competing solution. Personally I would not be surpiirsed if voice service becomes a freebie in the long run. Unlike Vonage because we are a network we have peering arrangements which if honored would prevent Verizon from blocking our traffic - in the Vonage model they are subject to traveling over someone else's road.
Our alternative is based on the packets of information sent not how they are generated. Information travelling on the internet can be broken down into 7 layers. See chart. There solution deals with the application layer and ours is a network solution. The hardware portion is the transport layer. It can be patented but the network layer portion can not.
I WROTE:
Should I assume that neom’s potential should be assessed, not in light of its patents, but in its ability (or inability) to become the ubiquitous application, gets its software onto every handheld – in essence, to be the first application to market in this arena (in other words, just as Microsoft or Google don’t have ownership of the operating system or search space, still, they have become the only games in town, so to speak)?
HE WRITES:
Yes that would be how I would look at it. If they can win in court but no one licenses the technology what value do they have. Next so much stuff is being done to capture this future market which does not even really exist now. I am sure other competing technologies which don't infringe on the patents will emerge. To me getting the software on a device is not as crucial as getting a telco carrier to let it be used. I would want to see more deals like the Virgin Atlantic deal with other carriers. The thought from a network perspective would be the operator charging 10 cents or some fee for every look-up.
FYI - over 65% of the internet including Google uses Open Source Linux and not Microsoft.
From an investment point of view I have no idea how to assess this, however I am not aware of many penny stocks in tech that have become big corps. I am however aware of lots of tech stocks that ended up on the pink sheets
I WROTE:
Thanks Chase, for that very thoughtful piece. I guess the bottom line for me is getting your perspective on the tech that Neomedia offers (you see, it’s all about me and whether I can make money off this company’s stock price…). It sounds like you are offering an alternative that accomplishes the same end, without infringing on neom’s patents (Is my understanding correct here?).
Should I assume that neom’s potential should be assessed, not in light of its patents, but in its ability (or inability) to become the ubiquitous application, gets its software onto every handheld – in essence, to be the first application to market in this arena (in other words, just as Microsoft or Google don’t have ownership of the operating system or search space, still, they have become the only games in town, so to speak)?
Again, you’re the tech guy and I don’t have a clue as the difference between one system and another. As an investor, I am only concerned with whether or not these guys are substantially and protectively differentiated. If not, there are big players who could effect the same result (i.e. spearhead the mobile marketing paradigm). Are Neomedia’s patents of any REAL value here?
Thanks again. I know you’re busy; reply only as is convenient.
HE WROTE:
"What is in it for the network" is what I am betting on in building a structured wireless mesh for Central Maryland. We believe the revenue will be large enough that in a competitive situation we can and will offer free high speed access of over 1 Mbps up and down.
A network is very similar to any transportation system - it delivers goods and information. Computer networks deliver goods such as software, music, video or what ever else information a user can download. If it is too big to download, FedEX can bring it to you. Consider a network to be similar to a railroad or a toll road. I can block anything coming on or off the network if I run it. Presently you have already given implied consent to filter out some info coming to you over the Internet - SPAM. Perhpas in your hhome you fliter out other content like porn from your kids or you want it done.
Besides selling ad words Google, Yahoo & others makes revenue by directing a search to a particular web site. You type in a subject for a book, a link to Amazon comes up and if you click threw Amazon pays Google some money, around 15 cents in certain instances for the traffic. Google also sells adwords like Paperclick.
If you are on my network all of this occurs over my road. What happens in the background when you click in books or pizza is the packet of information containing that request is translated into a number which identifies the site you wish to go to. This is called a DNS server. That DNS server resolves the translation and issue of connecting the sender and receiver. To save on addresses most users connect with a dynamic address which changes periodically as opposed to a static address which is assigned. This is done by your ISP or ntwork administration to creat efficentcy. We have a patent pending solution called HOTWORDS that lets us send your keyword request to our sponsored links. It works with any device connected to our network, which is why I was interested in Neomedia and its patents. Our patent is based on core packet switching, a totally different solution than Neomedia which is based on the hand held device. It all happens invisibly in the background for the user in nanoseconds.
What we as the network get is a share in the ad income stream paid by Amazon to Google or Paperclick for that matter. We don't publicize this to users but we do promote this to investors. Most users reaction is that this is a violation of privacy. What most users don't realize is that this already occurs in order for the net to work, only no one is attempting to capture the income revenue to any great degree. Part of the reason they don't is because older technologies such as wire line and cable are "smart networks" and can't. We are building a "stupid network" which does permit this. "Smart networks" was a theory proposed by a senior tech analyst at AT&T who released an article to the Internet about "Smart Networks" and that the future was in "Stupid networks". AT&T fired him and he now teaches at MIT. AT&T continued building a Smart Network and I believe was sold this year and is no more. The tech analyst is now considered one of the Internet prophets for predicting the future. Anyway if Paperclick were to say I am prohibited from capturing part of the income stream for any legal reason, I can block them from travelling on my network for free.
Having all purchases show up on a phone bill, or a device that could point and make a purchase is interesting but presents a major security problem. I could easily get my bills to show up on your bill which I don't think folks getting the bill would like very much, especially since they would not have a clue about who charged the purchase. Actually present credit card technology is so outdated they are a real major security risk. However no one has yet to come up with a economically viable alternative and the presents losses to banks don't justify a massive switch in technology. It is cheaper to add in a fraud ratio on a spread sheet.
The present regulations by the FCC, the Supreme Court and Congress state that information providers, ISP own their networks. Thus Verizon can in a year kick off an ISP from their DSL lines. You don't need AOL to connect threw Comcast. If Vonage traffic goes across my network I can block it. What is in it for the network is revenue. If you travel on my road I want a fee. Next if I do the billing, a separate service than traveling on my network I want an additional fee.
We estimated it will cost around $45 million to build a wireless Internet cloud over Central Maryland. Our investors and I would like a nice return for taking this risk. Our costs are alot less than the $350 million Verizon estimates it will cost to bring fiber to the premise over the same area. The back end money that changes hand is enormous and growing and we have devised a means to take our share to provide the end user with inexspensive access. Sort of like the business model of breweries which bought baseball teams and build stadiums so they could sell beer and sold cheap tickets.
a little about us -
Woodberry WISP LLC, owns and markets breakthrough Wi-Fi network technology which will grow to speeds 30 times that of a typical cable connection, will be the wireless equivalent of fiber with greater security than online banking. Woodberry WiSP high speed wireless data transfer technology not only provides real synchronous broadband connections capable of speeds upto 45Mbps but also provides added features and services to enhance both the consumer and business use and expansion of the Internet.
Ultra High-Speed 45Mbps Wireless Internet
Woodberry WISP delivers superior performance, mobility, security and reliability. Woodberry WISP’s ultra high-speed structured mesh wireless network carries four levels of security, and runs at current speeds of 1.5 Mbps (upload/download), and is about to expand to 3 Mbps and has the capacity to expand to 45Mbps. It is an adaptable and scalable architecture so as technologies improve and speeds increase the network can be upgraded.
VoIP
Woodberry WISP offers Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) with unlimited national and Canadian phone call service for $25 for consumers and starting at $45 for business. This service includes a host of features such as Call Waiting, Call Transfer, Call Hold, Call Forward, Caller ID, and Local Number Portability.
Woodberry WiSP’s wireless network is capable of providing mobile VoIP. A Wi-Fi VoIP phone from Woodberry Wisp can be used anywhere under our cloud of coverage or any open Wi-Fi Hotspot in the world. As our coverage area grows and better wireless VoIP handsets are manufactured, this phone service will be able to compete with traditional cell phones at a fractional of the cost of cell phones and offer features such as voicemail, conference calling and calling forward as standard features. Woodberry WiSP projects that cost for a mobile VoIP phone with unlimited minutes capable of connecting to any phone in North America will be $50.
VoD, IPRadio, IPTV, HDTV
In addition to Internet access, and VoIP, planned future products will include Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) with up to 150 channels of television including HDTV, including a software based Digital Video Recorder (DVR). IPRadio, allowing our customers to listen to their favorite syndicated Radio talk show programs at a time of day when you want to watch or listen. The audio content will be capable of being downloaded to an Mp3 player or iPod or played on a mobile Wi-Fi radio. Our customers will enjoy Video-On-Demand (VoD) service that will allow you to choose your favorite newly released full-length feature length films for download and viewing. It is projected the costs of these services will be less than 1/3 of typical cable costs or telco DSL.
Woodberry Wireless is the technical group which along with strategic partners will develop and market add-on features and applications for use over the Woodberry WiSP network providing such services as home and business security and monitoring systems, network help, internet back end services such as hosting, domain name registrations & traffic and ad monitoring, e-commerce sites, web design, audio (podcasting) and video design and hosting over the Woodberry WiSP network that is being built. Woodberry Wireless also builds and designs PBX phone systems for business and local wireless networks, and can manage such networks for the client remotely, allowing the business to concentrate on it core effieceintcies and not IT management.
Woodberry Marketing is the technical marketing group that provides ubiquitous advertising and marketing over the Woodberry WiSP wireless network providing ad words and other sales generating techniques to our subscribers, along with secured e-commerce solutions.
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->
I WROTE:
Thanks for looking at it. The EFF claim has been debunked (to my
understanding): the prior art was some Harvard or MIT guy 30 years ago
who was putting for idea for tech involving transmitting printed word.
Your point about "what's in it for the network" is one that I haven't
seen fully resolved (I don't fully understand the business), but I'm
wondering if mobile commerce (the whole point of Paperclick) would
benefit the networks to the extent that all purchases show up on a phone
bill (I don't know this to be true, but I've heard it bandied about).
One of the biggest/most prestigious global marketing firms has been
working with neomedia for almost a year (Foote & Cone; mostly
Euro-based).
They are represented by a well-known patent firm out of Chicago on a
contingency basis only (they get paid only if they win).
These things, combined with the fact that the writing is on the wall for
the direction of marketing (mobile, with all its connotations for highly
specific targeting) got me thinking that there might be something to
this $0.40 stock (I bought at $.22, sold some at $.50, but was wondering
if the hype of it going into the stratosphere was potentially
well-founded).
Thanks again for taking a look.
(I just saw a PR released this morning: another world-leading marketing
firm, Arnold, has just entered in a marketing/co-branding agreement
w/neomedia)
If you want to poke around some due diligence links go here:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=2276
See you soon,
Don't mean to be dense, but you are differentiating between carriers and SP's. I use the terms synonymously. How are you using the terms?
He's not doing anything different than what someone else could do. I guess, he's just doing it better (the tech he uses is superior (he says) and cheaper. The SPs are Enemy #1, are dinosaurs and hate what he's doing (whatever that is). But it's true, he's got some very willing potential partners (I would've chalked it up to hype, except for the fact the Pres of the bank I worked for for many years ($35 bill in assets) is trying to invest as well (I know the guy)).
You can see my buddy didn't slow down enough to grasp the fact the neom doesn't need to create new barcodes. It's the connection they "own". But I just ignored that (his DD was probably about 15min long). It's his point about the SP's and what they can get out of it that gave me pause. Since (from his perspective) that will be the key to this (SP involvement), I'm open to yer all's input as to why it makes direct economic sense for the SP's to be talking to neom today.
I have a buddy who is starting up some sort of wireless business (internet, phone, voip, tv). His conversations are so technical, I have a very hard time following him, but the money folks follow him alright (Legg Mason and Smith Barney are trying to shove $50mil into his hands, he's got the previous State's attorney who successfully sued msft in this state, and lots and lots of private equity partners who are trying to get a piece of his action). With all of that said, I perked up last night when he started talking about one of his revenue streams: A guy with a cell phone types in "pizza" and a mobile google search comes up and gives him the 5 closest pizza places. I told him about neomedia. At first he was just plain dismissive, but I persisted and this morning he looked at the patents and sent this email (below). I'm stumped as to his issue regarding "what's in it for the SP's?" Don't get hung up on the fact that he can't spell or communicate a thought all that coherently (by the way, he's spending the next few days with some Google guys on the West Coast):
HE WRITES:
Quickly perused the stuff you said and think that the patent only
applies to barcodes and is not as broad as you may beleive. eff wants to
bust the patent. http://www.eff.org/patent/wanted/patent.php?p=neomedia - these guys are
a very powerful geek group and they are targeting busitng the patent,
since there may be a prior art open source solution.
http://www.scanbuy.com/website/docs/april23_naplesnews.pdf your right
this suit will determine the validity oof the neomedia patent
Overall it is an intersting technology and if some wireless operators
license it it could be a winner. The interesting thought is lets say
Verizon, Cingular or Sprint license this technology for their networks -
does the users all get the same response when you type in pizza from the
corner of charles and redwood. If so someone will need to build a google
sized noc which will cost lots of money. If each network gets unique
info then even bigger DNS servers will be required.
Next what is in it for the network. If, I as a network operater am not
getting any revenue, especially cell phone operators who are running
scared from solutions such as what we are building, then they can easily
block the traffic to the Paperclick. The user will use a content
provider where the network gets revenue. Getting revenue for directing
clicks is how Google, Yahoo, AOL get their money and is not patentable.
recent FCC and US supreme court decisions state that a network ought not
to block a use of the internet such as VoIP or other application except
for quality of service issues. In reality I can blcok anything I want
and call it a QOS issue because the increased traffic by the competing
traffic degenerate my net. While in essence this ruling made on the
behalf of the telco's is bad, it is the essence of what will make our
efforts very very lucrative since user location based info is one of the
income streams we hope to catch.
All the patent infrigment cases seem to have been against mobile phone
barcode readers. Symbol and some other barcode manufactures have had
wireless scanners prior to 1995. So far all the cases have settled so
there is still doubt as to whether this is an enforceable patent. I
check and kewords and trademarks or a use of them is not patentable. As
for barcodes they would have to creat their own codes since standard
barcode use would not be patentable
http://www.paperclick.com/patents.jsp
PaperClick®
The future of Mobile Marketing is today. By taking a picture of a
barcode or entering a brand name or tagline into a mobile phone, mobile
users can now link to any Web page in seconds. No long URLs, searches,
hard-to-use phone menus, or endless links in home pages. Just, point,
click and download from anywhere, anytime.
Products, brand names, brochures, posters, anything can now be
real-world hyperlinks. Make a purchase, enter a contest, obtain a
rebate, get a coupon, register a product...the applications are endless!
Additionally, we provide click-through reporting for all barcodes and
words, similar to traditional web-based advertising. PaperClick – Surf
the Real World.
www.paperclick.com <http://www.paperclick.com>
The mobile virtual network operator, or MVNO, has quickly progressed
from concept to reality and is now considered one of the hottest
business strategies in the wireless industry.
The popularity of the MVNO strategy is certainly no surprise to . This
23-year wireless industry veteran has long been an MVNO proponent and
has worked with many wireless firms to develop their MVNO plans. A
former senior executive with MCI Communications and most recently the
executive vice president for business and corporate development at
mobile virtual network enabler X believes that MVNOs will revolutionize
and revitalize the wireless industry. In fact, he is using his wireless
expertise to help small firms and early stage companies develop business
strategies and negotiate relationships.
X new consulting firm, which has offices in Marin County, Calif., and
San Francisco. "I'm a startup guy," X says. "I like to help people get
started and build the initial relationships needed to grow faster."
X is familiar with wireless industry trends. He helped MCI negotiate its
wireless licenses back in the 1980s. Those licenses eventually were sold
to McCaw Cellular, which led to consolidation of the wireless industry.
When it comes to MVNOs, X believes this new phenomenon will have a
profound effect on the wireless industry. "Anyone who thinks the MVNO
trend is over is dead wrong," X says. "I think there will be another big
wave of MVNOs, and content is going to be the key to this game."
Specifically, X says, MVNOs will package content in a way that will
appeal to certain groups of consumers – ethnic groups, age groups, etc.,
similar to Virgin Mobile targeting of the teen and young adult market or
Movida's targeting of the Hispanic market. This type of segmentation is
difficult for traditional operators to accomplish because of their size.
"Once these high-speed networks are in place, they will have a profound
effect on the transition from voice to content," X says.
It's the value-added content and services that will keep MVNOs from
experiencing the same fate as traditional wireless resellers, which
compete with the large operators solely on price and have experienced
difficulties in recent years due to dwindling margins and increased
competition, he says.
There is zero info on that "research" firm or its principals. Now, that is hard to do! I mean, use google, and even search using the exact web address and it comes up empty (the search returns a message saying something like, "looks like your search word is a website address, why don't you try plugging that into the address bar since your search yields no results". And nothing on the principals Robert Wasserman and Anthony Morris. Zero, zilch. I bet if you plugged in your own name you'd get back something! The research report pasted onto IHUB looks likes a sophomoric pump (take a look at another, legitimate stock research report and compare it to this).
I may be overly skeptical, but I think this is just another one of these firms that is being compensated in some way.
Actually, I've been in (still am, minimally) since last winter at .22/sh. Don't be frightened or defensive by someone else's experience... Stick to your convictions; you may be rewarded.
Once 2pm, the last day of CTIA rolled around, and it was apparent that the news of the week was paint, I took most off the table (kept half in cash, half invested elsewhere (which has done well enough)). I say the news of the week was paint because we knew that the registry was active approx. 10 before CTIA (not released as PR till CTIA Day1) and we knew that Virgin was registered several days before CTIA (not released till CTIA Day2). So, the only new news that week was paint and I figured most folks would feel the same way as I did and would retreat a bit. I usually time things horrendously, but it's worked out this time. I thought I'd like to pick it back up (increase my position in the mid .30s) but I find that, having stepped back mostly, I'll be looking for something more substantive as a buy signal (I see so many industry related posts on IHUB with names like google, yahoo, aol, etc etc, I'm starting to wonder if it is really possible for neom's patents to strong arm these companies into partnership.
Again, my goal was to get out and get back in with more shares than I started with. I think that's still my goal, but the conviction is on the wane.
Exactly, lesnshawn. That's why I don't think that $75k was some uneducated figure that neom came up with on its own. It's most likely a pretty well-informed number with input from the parties that know what neom's got.
That's kind of my point. The price tag speaks to its initial target market (as you said, the big brand co's). I'd imagine that those folks are no slouches when it comes to matching up price and value. And I'd also imagine that neom (or their marketing rep) have done enough market research to avoid presenting something to sophisticated clients which would result in a stiff boot out the door, or, worse yet, a cold, "get off of my phone you outrageous flash in the pan sales monkey".
$75k doesn't sound like the kind of price you go in saying, "we really think that our technology will catch on; will you be the first to sign up?" No, to my way of thinking the price is high because they have a strong sense of what the market will bear as the story unfolds as to who neom is and what neom has.
I'd love to hear the sales presentation behind that $75k price tag. To my way of thinking, these guys must be pretty confident that they've got the goods to be basically taking the position: "you can get it cheap today at $75k, or take a chance at paying a lot more come January". It's either deleriously cocky, or else there's some real depth (non-pr'd to date) that substantiates the basis for charging that much. I'm betting these guys know what they own.
Astepahead had a little good luck several weeks ago, but, man-o-man he's had a big crash since those days (he specifically stated he was staking his reputation on very specific news items for CYBL that never materialized, has touted FCCN on to watch it drop, and pumped SWKJ only to see it also drift down and down (it's had a little pop in the last few days, but it is truly a doggy dog stock)).
Maybe, but it is kind of misleading to use that article as a source. The guy specifically states that he issued an invitation for folks to give their opinions. Some poster on this board even concurred that he was one of the folks who offered the Goog / neom reference. It's kind of disingenuous to point to an "article" as confirmation of a connection when the source of the article's content are the very folks who go on to use the article as confirmation. Kind of circular, don't you think?
And Wooger, this borders on the shameless:
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CLB00412&read=663892
(Self-ponderance: If one owns neom and then refers to a Wooger post as shameless, can one be said to truly own (I mean, really, deep down in the heart of hearts) -- truly own neom?)
That's all stretch. To read anything into a filing for a Summary Judgement is silly.
Joe, it is not clear at all that Virgin will be paying those kind of fees going forward. The $$ paid could have been for past transgressions. Indeed, the 10Q language could be read to say, "this is the $$ they paid us for past offences and for a license through 2016. We could make more $$ off Virgin if PaperClick gets up and running..." Actually, I think this is the more realistic reading (ongoing committments to provide licensing revenue (if existent) would have been a crown jewel that management would have highlighted specifically and quantitatively, i.e. "under the terms of the licencing Virgin agrees to pay $xx qtrly, monthly, annually, etc.") I believe Virin has paid all they are going to. If PaperClick gets up and running, they may want to pay for that... Again, read the language; I don't think I'm off base here.
Since Aura Digital is also the Paperclick partner in Australia, what is it about this promotion (Coke) that endeared itself more appropriately to hypertag than paperclick?
Hmmmm. (Success, could you please call Scanbuy and let them know that we already have this stuff taken care of)
Named by Fortune Magazine as one of their Top 25 Breakout Companies of 2005, Scanbuy is set to revolutionize the world of handset interactivity. Several manufacturers are expected to launch Scanbuy technology at the end of this year. Attia expects between 50 and 70 million devices to initially enter the marketplace, with many more to debut in the years to come.
Me? Come on, who would ever want to post there?
OT: Lesnshawn, a thorough reading of the terms and conditions of the proposed agreement reveals that your committment was predicated on the participation of one Dallaswa. Said Dallaswa did not explicitly evidence any sign/show/display or other form of committment thereto, thus nullifying any and all obligations by other subscribed parties (i.e. you & Neopathy).
Besides, why would you go and abandon all the folks who enjoy reading you over there?
Hix, I think they've got their eye on the ball. There's not one thing about this stock that resembles the vast majority of pennies out there (including the $175mil market cap: this tells me that there is some smart risk capital waiting alongside you and me). Well, there is one thing, a necessary evil, Cornell. But even there, it looks like the arrangement isn't the typical prostitutorial one that Cornell drags from bed to bed. Tells me neom is more like the kind of girl you'd bring home to mom.
Welcome.
I too believe that what neom is really lacking here is "encouragement" to "get earnings". Sometimes, despite our best efforts, despondency takes hold and we lose perspective. It just may be that management has simply forgotten to get the earnings, sidetracked a bit by a little lack of self-worth and a small detour into the self-indulgent gloomies. Could they just be waiting for some encouragement from from some clear-thinking well-wishers? Well then, heck, let's just get on the horn pronto and let 'em know, "go on now, get those earnings; you can do it!"
Can't be sure if the 250k trade at 4:16 was an aggregate or a single block, but, if it was a lone purchaser, $80k+ is quite a chunk to drop on a penny stock (I'm assuming it was a buy; it was posted at the ask)
I've got to believe that the BSD close is built into the price. Looks like a done deal and is just passing through proscribed/mandated waiting periods.
I'm too impatient. Question answered.
What happened to RetiredandPlaying?
Beacon, don't try to pass your blame by so non-chalantly. The real question here is, who is right and who is blameworthy. If you could please pin this down more definitively, I, for one, and I know that I speak for absolutely everybody, everywehere, would finally find some rest. It doesn't matter if you and he need to hash it out, back and forth and back again. It's important. The space is free and it's just plain worth it. We need some resolution and we're patient enough to follow you guys every step of the way.
JP you have woven golden strands of meaning through the space-time fabric of our souls; indeed, the very universe whispers its song of gratitude...
And Success, you are a godess of light. Your maternal warmth inebriates the fledgling lambs that take their happy slumber at your hem.