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.
Kenco. But you don't need an audit to report. 10Qs are not audited as far as I am aware. Reporting in the case of SCMI is a matter of choice and they have chosen not to do so. Any suggestion that they WANT to report but can't because of X, Y or Z is misleading.
GCRox99
If they shares were already owned by SCMI and given to Jacobs as remuneration, would that need to be reported?
I noticed you capitalized the YET to make it seem it is imminent IMO. But if SCMI wantd to report they could do it anytime. There is nothing stopping them other than their desire NOT TO REPORT. Merging, getting on to another board, getting finance or deals have nothing to do with the ability to report. They simply don't want to.
If Jacobs has bought more shares in SCMI than MMXT, then I would like to see the evidence of what he has bought.
And I like to hear his reasoning for recommending to a shareholder at the SHM (according to a post here) to buy SCMI in preference to MMXT.
Did he buy MMXT before the recent runup and is the runup genuine or manipulated by the few hands that hold the stock?
When it suited the insiders, weren't we being told that Kevin was on the phone twice a day to the head of BMG music (if I recall correctly). Now we are being told he didn't focus on his job.
Being located in New York was written into his contract. Who wrote that up?
Bleu
You don't suppose that what you have discovered is simply a counter suit in response to Mediamax's breach of contract suit with KC and his wife do you?
Do you know what contract Mediamax had with Clement's wife? Its not in the filings as far as I can see.
GCRox99
Clement and his wife also filed and were approved for removal of the Arizona civil case filed by Mediamax and had the case reassigned to Arizona District Court.
What is the significance of this? I'm not familiar with court law.
gregg99
"Zune" was not just announced after Howdy's post, suspecting you to think that SCMI might somehow be involved with the product.
That the product will be called "Zune" has been public knowledge for about 2 weeks now. For example....
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/11/microsofts-media-player-dubbed-zune/
There is no connection between Microsoft's new player and MediaMax. Just a throw away line to keep people suckered in.
Talk about innuendo.....
"The Company has recently established that certain IP owned by SunnComm might be financially leveraged through proposed acquisitions by certain MediaMax technology partner(s). These assets coupled with anticipated major funding, the combined resources of the companies, the new management team and recently-announced alliances, together with their anticipated revenue streams are expected to greatly assist the merged company in its intended elevation to a major exchange."
Now that's being forthright and specific.
IMO this PR is nothing but a reaction to the recent discussion on this board about taking legal action against the company. The PR is pure garbage. They just want to delay legal action.
If they really intended to merge they would do it and not talk about it endlessly. As Nike says - Just Do It.
amx8559
The date shown on that page is the date you are reading the article as far as I can see. That article is years old. Midbar was long ago bought out by Macrovision and the type of technology they are describing is the previous generation stuff that no one uses anymore.
What I would like to know is why Artie Ripp got paid $200K for setting up the deal with BMG, when according to Sting it was Scott who did it all along? And did we pay Scott anything for doing it, since he set up the deal prior to being employed by MMXT?
This is even less complementary
Billy Joel's first manger's name is Artie Ripp (no joke). He took Joel to the cleaners via an iron clad contract. Cold Spring Harbor, Joel's first solo album was a technical disaster. The music is good and the songs are fresh but the pressing of the album had technical anomalies like recording speed that made Joel's voice sound high and quivery. Billy Joel hated the result and set out to California, with his best friend's wife (Elizabeth) to live under an assumed name (aka Bill Martin) to break the contract with Ripp. It took Ripp a while to get it, but eventually with nearly a year of no Billy Joel to be found Ripp agreed to allow Columbia Records to buy out his contract with Joel. That freed Joel to embark on new musical endeavors, the first one under the Columbia label being Piano Man. Artie Ripp still holds all the rights to Cold Spring Harbor and The Harbor Sessions.
I saw Artie Ripp interviewed on the ABC News Show called 20/20 about the time Billy Joel had released 52nd Street, many years ago. What a giant Los Angeles ass he was then. I doubt he has changed at all. He openly bragged that he still gets X amount of cents (which adds up to big bucks) for all of Billy Joel's releases. He sarcastically wished Billy Joel to have a long and prosperous musical career. Artie Ripp can best be described as a sleazy shmuck. Billy Joel has never disclosed the exact nature of what Ripp gets from him. If anyone knows I would be interested in hearing about it.
http://www.talkaboutthemusic.com/group/alt.music.billy-joel/messages/84042.html
I hope SunnComm fares better in their association with Artie Ripp than Billy Joel. I've been reading Joel's biography and none is complementary about Ripp.
So I wrote a lot of songs and people in the music business said, "Well, OK, if you want people to hear your songs, maybe you should record them." OK, I got a record deal in the era of the singer-songwriter, on Michael Lang's label. Then I got switched to Artie Ripp's label, like a baseball trade, and I ended up on Family Records. All right, I made the record and then they told me, "Now you have to go out on the road and promote it."
I'm on the road six months and I'm thinking, "This is a kind of weird way to be a songwriter." It ended up that I became Billy Joel, rock star, which was not what I intended. Don't get me wrong, it's great. But I didn't realize what I'd signed away. The guy who was managing me at the time was in cahoots with the company that signed me, so he became a part of the company. For six months I didn't get any money, nobody in the band got any money. We didn't have any food, and the company would say, "Get some white bread and peanut butter and just eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches."
I said, "Something isn't right here. I got to get out of these bad contracts, these deals." That is when I went out to Los Angeles and sort of disappeared.
http://www.superseventies.com/ssbillyjoel.html
Howdy was replying to a post of Kenco that stated MediaMax was installed even if the EULA was rejected. I know Howdy was talking about what was written on the CD and that EULA "light" could be construed as giving authority to initially install MediaMax to protect the CD until the full EULA was displayed and accepted/rejected, but that EULA "light" does not excuse the software remaining on the PC if the user rejects the full EULA.
Let's stop pretending that none of this didn't happen. It did. Let's also stop acting like shonky insurance salemen pointing to some comments in small print. You, I and everyone knows that all users would assume that if the user rejected the EULA then nothing would be left on their PC.
The reason we are sitting sub penny today is due to what happened last November. Pretenting it didn't happen and trying to re-write history will get is nowhere.
Howdy,
kenco, with the outer packaging of protected CD's clearly marked that they contained a certain DRM type of technology, it is viewed as a certain type of "EULA light". The technology is part of the CD, and by reading the outer packaging, then "agreeing" to insert the CD into ones computer and "something" has to run the product inserted. Again, outside opinions have come in and determined that MediaMax / BMG were not spyware.
I am surprised that you have forgotton so soon what the issue was.
It is clear that something had to be installed in order to protect the CD when it was inserted so that it couldn't be copied before the EULA was displayed and accepted/rejected. But once the EULA was rejected, Mediamax should have been removed from the PC.
That was an error and was unrelated to the spyware allegations.
I don't know what is to be achieved by denying what actually happened.
Just because people may not like what Kenco has to say, it doesn't mean she must be contradicted no matter what, even to the extent of denying past history.
I wonder why "Andrea Clement" (his wife?) is also a defendant?
Yes I used the word attack, but that was not attack in the sense of "agression" but in the context of countering an argument and in this case an argument that I did not promote but one that ALJ tried to imply I was saying. I was highlighting the fact that rather than address the issues I had raised, he attributed to me something I didn't say or even agreed with and then went on to attack/counter that.
I have no problem with someone countering any argument I put forward with reasoned argument. I use the term attacking an argument in that sense. This is what this board should be about, because the only way one can learn something from the board, and not just regurgitate entrenched opinion, is to see both sides of the argument and the information used to back both arguments up.
But I notice a few here are willing to make statements with no basis in fact and when asked to substantiate what has been said, simply reply - "that is my opinion and I am entitled to expess it". No one can force anyone to substantiate what is said, but it sure does show a complete lack of conviction by those expressing that opinion. That being said, I do acknowledge that there are times when information is so scant that one can only express an opinion.
amx
MediaMax Version 5 now enables SunnComm to pursue additional lucrative revenue opportunities outside the core music business initiative of protecting commercial audio CDs. These new areas include protecting and enhancing CD+G formatted Karaoke CDs, On-demand audio and video downloading from the Internet, DVD protection for movies and stand-alone music kiosks that allow consumers to create legal compilation CDs from licensed reputable online music sources, to name just a few.
Yes, that's MediaMax Version 5 that was supposed to allow that. But did it? NO. More fluff that never eventuated.
Try this more recent quote...
"Industry events beginning last November surrounding CD copy protection have provided an unprecedented opportunity for SunnComm to concentrate on (and expand) to other commercially viable digital and optical media products that had been overshadowed by CD copy protection in the past.
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/060508/0127645.html
Screamineagle
I don't know whether we have other products in the works or not, but it has been rumored for far longer than just since the BMG fiasco.
That rumor has never been expressed here, not have I heard it expressed in any other forum. In fact that is the opposite to what has been officially said and reiterated by many here. Which is that we have moved from being a 1 product company. The talk of multiple products only became the official line when it became clear that CD copy protection is dead for the foreseeable future, meaning there was no possibility of any revenue coming in.
Since when is an alternative viewpoint "attacking"?
That's not something I have said and I certainly don't hold that opinion.
If that's the case, you are constantly on the attack.
Why have you posed the question to me when it is obvious from this statement that it is you who hold that opinion by implying that I am constantly on the attack by expressing an alternative viewpoint?
For one, the fact that the lights are still on after a series of events that could/would have washed away most companies
As I said, a good reason to keep the lights on is that management can continue to pay themselves their large salaries so long as there are shares that can be sold. Why close shop when you can continue to derive salaries in the $100K+ range, even if the company produces nothing but fluff PRs.
I don't know whether we'll make it or not, but a few things give me optimism.
I would be optimistic if the company actually provided a bit more detail on what they are supposed to be working on, rather than broad concepts such as a "music and video download product". The fact that their timetable for delivery is beyond the realms of possibility and would be regarded as laughable by anyone with s/w development experience shows to me beyond doubt that the talk of new products is solely fluff to keep the SP up and nothing more.
Well Alj14, if you read my post you would see I quoted you exactly. Conversely, you are stating that I quoted you as saying ""for SunnComm to emerge as the dominant force in" all or most or even many DRM markets" Please show where I quoted you as saying that.
As to the point I was making, I was picking up on your assumption that because Macrovision wasn't in or was weak in a particular market, that didn't imply it was open slather for SunnComm. This is your quote again...
What continues to surprise me is that, considering the total fiasco of First4Internet and the absence or the continuing weakness of MVSN in sectors of interest to us, you fail to realise how little it would take for SunnComm to emerge as the dominant force in various DRM markets.
Where in that statement is your recognition that there are other players out there other than Macrovision and F4I. You simply have no understanding of the who the major players are. As to the "various" unexplored markets where you believe we have a chance of succeeding, I notice you failed to provide examples.
The fact of life is that Microsoft is the major player in most areas of DRM, much to the dismay of content providers. If there is money to be made or an opportunity to extend the influence of Windows Media, then Microsoft will be there too. Yet your quote implied that the absense of Macrovision and F4I would mean it would take little for SunnComm to be the dominant force in these new markets.
and Google as only existing because they struck "lucky" -- which sounds very like classifying them as a freak phenomenon unlikely to stay the course, because no mere "luck" holds for ever.
I guess when you have nothing to counter my arguments, the best thing to do is to make erroneous conclusions on a statement I made and assert that they are my conclusions, then attack them instead of my arguments. You do realize that they are your conclusions, not mine.
The current head-count therefore works out at five
That is one per project, since there are five projects on the boil according to most claims.
You really ought to talk to some people who work in s/w development. Most projects of any size would require just one person to do the documentation, never ming analyzing, programming, debugging, fixing and the myriad of other tasks required to bring a project to fruition. And if the one programmer is writing programs (a very time consuming task) who is it that is tenacious in pursuing research and development along a path where it has no apparent rivals
I suppose all this ground breaking R & D is being done during coffee breaks.
When it became quite clear to everyone that Sony-BMG would not contemplate CD copy protection for the foreseeable future, SunnComm knew that their world had just collapsed. They were a company with a product that they could not sell. It was then that we started hearing about 5 new products, because that was the only way to stop a collapse of the SP. But that in itself was not enough, as it is evident that it would take years to bring new products to market, so we now have the assertions that SunnComm will bring their products to revenue generation in just 6 months. That flies in the face of all business sense.
Alj
What continues to surprise me is that, considering the total fiasco of First4Internet and the absence or the continuing weakness of MVSN in sectors of interest to us, you fail to realise how little it would take for SunnComm to emerge as the dominant force in various DRM markets
The dominant force in DRM is Microsoft with its Windows Media DRM. If you think Macrovision is the competition, you should do a bit more research.
SunnComm's MediaMax is just an add on to Windows Media DRM and is not a DRM in its own right. It just allows copy management of CDs, but unlike a real DRM, it does not protect the content when it is moved to another platform.
Microsoft's DRM dominates by far (except for the niche market built around the iPods by Apple). It is the only DRM that is pervasive across many platforms, from content stored on the internet to PCs to consumer devices like MP3 players and mass storage entertainment centers. Its dominance is also growing, not declining.
If you think SunnComm with a couple of programmers and no real DRM background is going to oust Microsoft, think again. You are going to have to persuade every industry player to adopt SunnComm's product and ditch that of Microsoft, and that includes persuading Microsoft to ditch its own DRM in favor of SunnComm's on the Windows platform.
Macrovision's dominance is in a few niche areas and all of them are in decline because they are tied to physical media like CDs and DVDs. The one Macrovision product that has some sort of universal usage is the ACP (Analog Copy Protection), but Microsoft have licensed that to fill some gaps in Windows Media for the analog hole.
The fact is SunnComm is not a player in the DRM world.
because I expect substantial or massive revenue streams to begin flowing in Q3
I expect zero or just some fluff intercompany revenue for the foreseeable future. To suggest that SunnComm, with just a few programmers, have identified not one, but several markets, that they can develop products for and exploit to reap substantial revenue in just a timespan of just a few months is not realistic. Are all the other development companies with substantially larger resources than SunnComm just asleep?
To bring a single product to market that has the potential to generate significant revenues would probable require a team of 20 or so and would require a timeframe of several years. OK, sometimes one can get lucky and strike on something so revolutionary and unique that a few people can make big money in a relatively short time (Google etc.). But only a handful of such companies appear each decade.
SunnComm are so far along the development cycle that they cannot even describe their product other than in broad sweeping terms, such as "a download product".
Take a look at what it took to eventually get MediaMax into a revenue generating position. From mid 2000 to early 2004. That was a period of 4 years and ended up just generating a few hundred thousand in revenue. But now we are to accept that they can put together 4 or 5 products for unchartered markets in a matter of months, producing substantial revenues. This is the company that cannot even file on time and cannot even put a merger together.
I said before Christmas that I believed the chances of the company succeeding was probably under 10%. I now think that was overly optimistic.
I believe the only reason the show is still on the road is because so long as there are enough shares sellable to cover salaries, what motivation is there for management to pull the plug now.
Steh....
I am disappointed with you. I would have thought you would be able to differentiate between those who are being "sucked in" and those who are doing the sucking by now. It is so obvious.
It makes absolutely no sense for KC to oppose the merger. KC is CEO of MediaMax Technology and currently MediaMax has no assets other than a technology agreement that is worthless and some pre-paid accounting type fluff.
KC's renumeration is a substantial salary from MediaMax Technology and options to buy MediaMax stock at a price far north of where it is today. If the merger doesn't go ahead, MediaMax is dead. (Why keep up the expensive farce of they being a marketing company with international reach - we all know they are just 2 people sitting in the same office). So his options would be worthless and there would be nothing to pay his salary.
The only value lies with SunnComm, so it is in KC's interest to see the merger go through, as he will be CEO of the merged company.
I cannot see where Granite has any sway whatsoever over KC. I believe their exclusive contract to arrange financing has expired and I can't see their share ownership listed, so they have either no shares or a non-significant amount.
SunnComm's ownership in MediaMax Technology
The latest filing has SunnComm owning 38M shares (19.79%) and Project 1000 just owning 0.6M (0.29%)
A year ago these figures were SunnComm 50M (27.5%) and Project 1000 22M (12.12%)
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1057024/000119983505000065/fourteenc_def.txt
It seems Project 1000 has dispensed with (sold?) pretty much all the MediaMax shares that were to be distributed as dividends.
We have no evidence KC had done anything wrong. Stingray has continued to make unsubstantiated allegations and when asked to provide evidence, has not done so once. Yet he is the first to demand substantiation from others.
I see nothing here but an attempt to divert blame from the real culprits in this scheme. KC was, at best, onboard for just a few months, yet our demise is being blamed on him. He is also supposed to be in colusion with Granite, yet the ones who seem to also blame Granite and seem to know so much about their devious schemes cannot even provide the simplest of contact information for Granite.
My opinion is that KC is probably too honest for this company. His contract prevents him speaking out (just read it) and so rather than lie, which the others have no problem doing, he has decided to remain quiet.
I and my group invested in MediaMax because of representations made by Peter Jacobs and Bill Whitmore through PRs and other communication. KC was not part of the scene then. We are where we are today because of the incompetence of Peter Jacobs and Bill Whitmore, not because of Granite or KC.
Sting
I don't see the relevence of the 2 companies needing to be combined for Jacobs to speak out. The questions that have been raised here that people are looking for answers for are probably more relevent to SunnComm than to MediaMax Technology.
As I understand it, we are back in the development stage for some new products and until they are completed, MediaMax has nothing to sell. In fact, according to the last filing, the marketing agreement doesn't even cover those new products.
So it is what SunnComm is doing that is important and we haven't heard a peep from them for months.
Didn't Golusin leave?
Gregg99.
Exactly.
Why demand a statement from Clement? Jacobs is still officially President and CEO of SunnComm (we have not been officially told otherwise).
Stop blaming Clement. Jacobs has a tongue too. Why is he not saying anything?
He is the real one in charge and Clement is just one of his pawns.
Peter Jacobs, as CEO and president of SunnComm, have you nothing to say?
Kevin is being set up as the scapegoat for Jacobs failures. We have seen it all before. There is always someone else to blame. The shorts, the bashers, Macrovision, Apple. Every few months they come out with someone other than Peter Jacobs to blame. If Clement is so bad, who appointed him? If Granite is so bad, who contracted them?
Flydoc,
Not exactly. I have seen that document too.
I am simply asking Stingray what the source is for this statement he made.
To me this became very obvious when Granite delayed with unending delaying tactics to complete the funding that they agreed to . Typical " Vulture" type tactics! Commit to funding then delay , make a partial payment wait, renegotiate better terms. Delay over and over with the check is in the mail. Yep it was sent by Pony Express out of New York going east and the pony could not swim across the ocean!
There is nothing in the filing to support that statement.
We all know the funding didn't materialize. But there could have been many reasons for that. Stingray gave specific reasons and I would really like to know what is the source of that information.
"Maybe it was opinion based on inuendo, or more likely, inuendo based on opinion"
No. Stingray wrote this:
"I read the filings, the agreeements and the commitmment that were made"
to support his statement....
To me this became very obvious when Granite delayed with unending delaying tactics to complete the funding that they agreed to . Typical " Vulture" type tactics! Commit to funding then delay , make a partial payment wait, renegotiate better terms. Delay over and over with the check is in the mail. Yep it was sent by Pony Express out of New York going east and the pony could not swim across the ocean
The filings and agreements are public documents that I have read. What Stingray has written is not supported by those.
I would like to see how this "simple shareholder" supports his statement. Links should be easy.
"I read the filings, the agreeements and the commitmment that were made"
OK. So can you show a link that supports what you wrote. I read those documents too and there is nothing there to substantiate what you wrote.
Stingray2
To me this became very obvious when Granite delayed with unending delaying tactics to complete the funding that they agreed to . Typical " Vulture" type tactics! Commit to funding then delay , make a partial payment wait, renegotiate better terms. Delay over and over with the check is in the mail. Yep it was sent by Pony Express out of New York going east and the pony could not swim across the ocean!
How could you possibly know this?
Even if it were told to you by Peter/Bill/Kevin in violation of Regulation FD, why would you assume their version to be correct, unless they showed you the documents to support what you just wrote.
In fact Granite's job was to organize funding from others, not to do the funding themselves.
I would really like to understand where you get this intimate knowledge of what transacted between Granite and SCMI/MMXT. It sure is odd that us "ordinary" shareholders are not privy to such detailed information.
I would suspect that the downloads are in Microsoft's Windows Media format. Windows Media DRM can protect the files from copying to DVD or to another computer.
Sting. I don't see how it validates anything.
All I see is a PR that costs maybe $1000 to put out. They always have a series of "positive PRs" coming up to the shareholders meeting that almost always never work out as described.
What would validate that they have developed new products is a PR from a reputable company (medium to big music label, studio etc) stating they have tested one of the new products and are interested.
Words mean little and from my experience of SunnComm, their words mean nothing at all.
Question re Pinksheets
I hope we don't arrive at this, but just in case.
If MMXTE misses the next deadline and is dropped to the Pinksheets, is trading on the Pinksheets automatic, or must they apply to get on the Pinks? What I'm trying to ascertain is whether there could be a period during which MMXT cannot be traded because it has been dropped from OB and is not yet on the pinks, if that makes sense.
Figures are just to 30 September 05. They are not the full year figures and don't seem to have anything to do with the 10-K filing. These figures were already shown in the last 10Q filing, for September 05. Maybe they reflect some minor changes to those originally filed.
Mario, has your status changed?
Hey Mario, you work for MMXTE and you don't know when they are filing!
to which you replied...
I work for Sunncomm and ...
But last year you said
I am an Investor communications consultant, I am the acting IR rep for both companies,
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=7043068
"I'm just assuming that the people who claim to have met him are telling the truth."
According to his contract, Kevin is to work out of New York. Did the people who met him, meet him in NY or Phoenix? Or did they not say?