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.
Forgot to mention the Netsolutions shows the name registered by McBride back in 1998.
Keep in mind that Miluky is an email name registered to McBride. Miluky has been posting on RB since February.
Certainly a lot to contemplate over the weekend. I would like to hear more from Chairman FG other than for longs to just ignor Milucky/Truthseeker/Floyd Schneider. Who is this?
Of course this MiluckyMcBride has never posted before, so no way to check any history of posts on RB. I have seen this style of continuous single letter posts spelling out a name or message, also use of song lyrics, on RB board. But haven't had a chance to see who it is. Hmmmm...all sounds a little fishy.
Just reviewed most of Miluky's posts on RB. He is certainly very knowledgeable about SeaView. He shows expertise in many areas: technology, patents, financial, marketing, SEC regs. He defers constantly to his access to JR by phone and email . And tends to address his responses to the entire audience on board, not just to a specific poster. You can picture many of these responses from a CEO of a company!
Still haven't reached a conclusion about all this. How about some help in figuring it all out?
One possible positive from today's drop is a lot of volume. Hopefully some of the vendors such as VideoCom or past shell company insiders are the sellors today. Maybe more shares being bought by individuals with long-term outlook. This should reduce future selling pressure and allow us to develop a nice upward movement in coming weeks and months.
Does this conclusion make sense? Comments?
I'm surprised you still are able to post. At today's prices, you should sell the computer!
How goes it? -srs
Wow, unless something happens during last hour, can you believe the lack of volume today? Wonder if Sevu will be doing a PR this week? Certainly think they could report some record sales orders, but may be holding off due to the election fiasco.
-srs
I sure thought the 3 powerhouse PR's would have driven price much higher today. But the volume really petered out during the afternoon. Unless we get another buying rally in last 15 minutes, it doesn't look good for $12. Too bad, but there's always next week. Maybe we'll see announcement about AMEX or even more contracts. That should get price rolling again!
Have to leave now, and will miss the end of trading. Good luck to all longs!
I believe that refers to the interest and return of principle assuming that it is not converted to shares. -srs
dk76, I think your conclusion about the restriction is wrong, and the person at SEVU was telling it like it is (assuming your debenture agreement is the same as mine.)
On the cover letter I received with the stock certificate is states: It will be necessary for you to hold the certificate for 12 months from the date of issue. The key word here is "certificate" not "debenture".
There was also a disclaimer that needed my signature. It stated: It is understood that the debenture can be converted to stock immediately upon SeaView's 506 offering becoming available. It is totally understood that the 506 shares, when converted will be restricted for 12 months, during this period you will not be able to sell your shares.
You might want to take another look at your paperwork. Of course, perhaps they issued various types of debentures with different terms, but I doubt it because the 506 offerings are highly regulated by SEC. Good luck.
I'm no expert, but I believe it is 12 months from the date when the debenture is converted and the restricted shares are issued (the date on the share certificate.)
Does anybody know the procedure for getting the restriction off the certificates? I am holding the certicates myself. Is this something the transfer agent does automatically after the 12 months, or do I have to take some action. My debenture was converted to restricted shares back in December 99, so I am assuming they are tradeable in Dec 2000. Never dealt with this before, so any help would be appreciated. (I don't plan to sell right away, but would like to have the option.) -srs
Great Day, FG. Want to make a prediction on tomorrow? -srs
Seahag, other than the big run-up back in March, today should be record trading volume. But I bet tomorrow, once news is better distributed, will be an even stronger day. Three giant PR's in a row - great timing for AMEX announcement if Rich has that in his pocket. If he does though, he may choose to look for market jump after the election. Just guessing though on this? -srs
Sounds like things are starting to happen! Retailers Radio Shack, Ace, Trustworthy, and True Value Hardware store chains pushing up orders to new highs. $80 Million + contract with Taiwan, new COO announced, and final candidate for CFO selected. We have been patient and now should start seeing rewards! Yes!
Trading volume is skyrocketing right now, so higher share price will start happening today. Can't wait to see tomorrow!
-srs
SeaView Taiwan Contract Will Exceed $80 Million [SEVU-news]
SeaView Taiwan Contract Will Exceed $80 Million
ST. PETERSBURG, Fla., Nov. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- SeaView Video Technology Inc.
(OTC Bulletin Board: SEVU) (www.sevu.com) today released the following
information from Logis-Tech Inc., the Alexandria VA-based teaming partner
representing the Company to the Department of Defense. Logis-Tech Director of
Government Marketing, Frank Travis, issued the following statement:
"We have been working on a major contract with Taiwan. Top military
advisors have visited us here in the United States. In addition, our people
have made two presentations there. We have demonstrated the multi-camera
system from SeaView Video Technology Inc., utilizing the IRFS(TM) system. Our
overall contract is several hundred million dollars, and we have allotted
funding for SeaView's "SecureView" product.
"Security is a major portion of this sale, and SeaView will be receiving
an $80-million minimum order to provide cameras, IR floodlights, and control
CPUs. The SecureView concept provides an economical and quick method of adding
quality video."
Col. Larry Hoffman (USA ret.), SeaView National Sales VP, commented: "This
project essentially mirrors the National Guard project here in the US, and the
7th ARCOM contract in Europe. Our first two Guard buildings will get a test
run this month. We are also finding that county and state governments are
interested in the concept. Logis-Tech will install and service all these
systems. The keys to this entire product line are simplicity and economics in
installation. Just like the consumer side, screw in the light bulbs and play
on any TV through the power line."
SEAVIEW HIRES COO
The Company has hired George S. Bernardich III as Chief Operations
Officer. Mr. Bernardich recently retired after 28 years with the JCPenney Co.
Inc. He held several top positions with the company, including Catalog Media
Manager and Buyer positions. He was involved in increasing volume to over $500
million, and received the coveted Catalog Media Manager of the Year award in
1997. Most recently, he was appointed by JCPenney CEO Jim Oesterreicher to
spearhead merchandising projects at Largo, FL-based Eckerd Drug. Bernardich
received his Bachelor of Business Administration degree from Youngstown State
University, graduating Magna Cum Laude in 1977.
"George brings us a wealth of knowledge and contacts in the retail
world," said SeaView CEO Rich McBride. "Plus, we will utilize his management
and distribution experience. SeaView is growing rapidly into a major company,
and we need a strong management team to lead the way. The entire company is
looking forward to working with George.
"I've also picked a final candidate for the CFO position," McBride
continued. "When the employment contract is signed, I'll be making a formal
announcement."
ABOUT SEAVIEW VIDEO TECHNOLOGY INC.
SeaView Video Technology, Inc. manufactures, distributes, and sells marine
and security-related video camera equipment for recreational and commercial
customers worldwide. They are the largest manufacturer of Infrared Underwater
Camera Systems. SeaView Marine Division products are now available through a
Dealer Network of over 800 retail store dealers.
SecureView, the Company's innovative "camera in a light bulb,"
incorporates proprietary IRFS (TM) technology to transmit live video through
the electrical wiring of any home, office, or building. SecureView installs
and sets up quickly and simply, eliminating expensive installation costs,
drilling and cables.
SeaView trades under the OTC BB symbol SEVU, and has applied for a listing
on the American Stock Exchange (the symbol STV has been reserved). Estimated
3rd Quarter 2000 sales increased 1400% over the same period in 1999.
website: www.sevu.com
email: info@sevu.com
message board: www.investorshub.com (keyword: SEVU)
Investor Information: McBride & Associates, 727-820-0711
(www.rlmcbride.com)
This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section
21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which are intended to be covered
by the safe harbors created thereby. Investors are cautioned that all forward-
looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including, without
limitation, the ability of SeaView Video Technology Inc. to accomplish its
stated plan of business. Although SeaView Video Technology Inc. believes that
the assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements contained herein are
reasonable, any of the assumptions could be inaccurate, and, therefore, there
can be no assurance that the forward-looking statements included in this press
release will prove to be accurate. In light of the significant uncertainties
inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of
such information should not be regarded as a representation by SeaView Video
Technology Inc. or any other person that the objectives and plans of SeaView
Video Technology Inc. will be achieved.
SOURCE SeaView Video Technology Inc.
-0- 11/02/2000
/CONTACT: J R Cox, SeaView Video Technology Inc., 727-866-3660, or
email, info@sevu.com/
/Web site: http://www.seaviewresearch.com/
-- FLTH020 --
9687 11/02/2000 13:03 EST http://www.prnewswire.com
Copyright PR Newswire 1998. All rights reserved.
It would be neat if you were right about AMEX, but I think news is significant on its own merits. It should get some price movement going. Since Monday's PR volume has increased significantly. -srs
Wish I could buy some more now too, but my other stocks are so down, no room to margin without selling them at big losses - bummer!
I'd bet we start seeing the stock move up tomorrow! Buy now if you got the cash. JMHO
-srs
Anybody know who Videocom, Inc and their relationship to SeaView? They filed form 144 for 100,000 shares (nearly $900,000). Perhaps a supplier? Could they have anything to do with financing the mass-production run? Anybody heard of them? -srs
Crystal, Get a Grip. Doesn't sound like you're having any fun. Sevu is a long term investment. The company is still an infant and needs time to grow. Like a lot of two and three year olds, somewhat unpredictable as they learn to cope with their world.
Maybe you ought to sell some of your shares, just to take the pressure off. Put the rest of them away and not get upset with the day-to-day news and perceived shortcomings. (Although I think in light of what the rest of the market has done, they are holding up quite well - wish my fiber optics were doing as well! If you sell some SEVU it's a great time to buy into some of the FO's such as GLW, NT, JDSU. They will bounce back in next few weeks and you can take the profit and buy back into SEVU if you feel better about it.)
Figure out a way to enjoy this stock. IMO it is hard to find a gem like this with so much upside potential. -srs
The AC-LAN product line sounds great and is fun to dream about for now. Hopefully the company will keep the focus and limited resources (especially people/management) on getting SecureView product line going. They appear to have more than enough to do just to get SecureView rolling.
Without the "Views" I hope McBride keeps the PR's pumping out on weekly or twice monthly basis, so we get some idea of how well SecureView is doing. It's a real bummer to have to wait for quarterly filings to find out how well things are going.
-srs
MY conclusion from looking into this Fair Disclosure stuff:
McBride should not be issuing PR's or "Views from the Bridge" suggesting potential vendor contracts that could be considered significant as pertains to stock price valuation, without also including them under Item 5 of the Form 8-K filings. I don't believe these potential contracts have ever been included in the Form 8-K filings, and shouldn't be in the filings until they are truely done deals.
If McBride arrives at the same conclusion, i will sorely miss his communications that give us an important insight into how the company is moving ahead. But the last thing SEVU needs is a bunch of shareholder liability suits! -srs
Any comments?
Tony8, I see your point and agree with you. However McBride's "Views from the Bridge" pose a different potential problem. When McBride's "Views" mention potential contracts with Home Depot, Walmart, k-mart, whoever and then they do not come to fruition, or are significantly delayed, AND they are not also disclosed in 8-K filings - he is seen as hyping the company and open to liability. This is a different issue entirely from the FD concern that a significant event is disclosed to an analyst or major institutitional investor prior to the general public which would include the "little" shareholders such as us.
I must retract my conclusion from my previous post. McBride's "Views from the Bridge" could get him into trouble with shareholders who become disappointed when something doesn't happen, although not because of the intent of this regulation to prevent private disclosures before public disclosure. -srs
For those interested the Final Ruling is available at
http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7881.htm
Here is a portion that I think is quite relevant to SEVU and the "Views from the Bridge":
4. "Public Disclosure" Required by Regulation FD
Rule 101(e) defines the type of "public disclosure" that will satisfy the requirements of Regulation FD. As proposed, Rule 101(e) gave issuers considerable
flexibility in determining how to make required public disclosure. The proposal stated that issuers could meet Regulation FD's "public disclosure"
requirement by filing a Form 8-K, by distributing a press release through a widely disseminated news or wire service, or by any other non-exclusionary
method of disclosure that is reasonably designed to provide broad public access -- such as announcement at a conference of which the public had notice
and to which the public was granted access, either by personal attendance, or telephonic or electronic access. This definition was designed to permit issuers
to make use of current technologies, such as webcasting of conference calls, that provide broad public access to issuer disclosure events.
Commenters generally favored the flexible approach provided by Rule 101(e). The American Society of Corporate Secretaries and the Financial
Executives Institute, among others, agreed that the definition should not stipulate particular means of technology used for public disclosure. Individual
investors supported the idea that issuers should open their conference calls to the public through means such as webcasting over the Internet. Some
commenters, however, raised the concern that conference calls or webcasts should not be permitted to supplant the use of press releases as means of
disclosing material information.63 Others suggested that we provide that an issuer's posting of information on its website should also be considered sufficient
Regulation FD disclosure.64
After considering the range of comments on this issue, we have determined to adopt a slightly modified definition of "public disclosure" that would provide
even greater flexibility to issuers in determining the most appropriate means of disclosure. As adopted, Rule 101(e) states that issuers can make public
disclosure for purposes of Regulation FD by filing or furnishing a Form 8-K, or by disseminating information "through another method (or combination of
methods) of disclosure that is reasonably designed to provide broad, non-exclusionary distribution of the information to the public."
a. Form 8-K Disclosure
Commenters generally opposed the proposed new Item 10 of Form 8-K based, in large part, on a concern that people would construe a separate Item 10
filing as an admission that the disclosed information is material.65 In light of the timing requirements for making materiality judgments under Regulation FD,
commenters wanted to be able to err on the side of filing information that may or may not be material, without precluding a later conclusion that the
information was not material. Commenters recommended amending Item 5 of Form 8-K to include required Regulation FD disclosures.66 Some
commenters also suggested that Regulation FD submissions on Form 8-K should not be treated as "filed" for purposes of the Exchange Act.
In light of these comments, we provide that either filing or furnishing information on Form 8-K solely to satisfy Regulation FD will not, by itself, be deemed
an admission as to the materiality of the information. In addition, while we retain a separate Item, we also are modifying Item 5 of Form 8-K to address
commenters' concerns. As revised, issuers may choose either to "file" a report under Item 5 of Form 8-K or to "furnish" a report under Item 9 of Form 8-K
that will not be deemed "filed." If an issuer chooses to file the information on Form 8-K,67 the information will be subject to liability under Section 18 of the
Exchange Act. The information also will be subject to automatic incorporation by reference into the issuer's Securities Act registration statements, which are
subject to liability under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act. If an issuer chooses instead to furnish the information,68 it will not be subject to
liability under Section 11 of the Securities Act or Section 18 of the Exchange Act for the disclosure, unless it takes steps to include that disclosure in a filed
report, proxy statement, or registration statement. All disclosures on Form 8-K, whether filed or furnished, will remain subject to the antifraud provisions of
the federal securities laws.
b. Alternative Methods of Public Disclosure
We are recognizing alternative methods of public disclosure to give issuers the flexibility to choose another method (or a combination of methods) of
disclosure that will achieve the goal of effecting broad, non-exclusionary distribution of information to the public.69
As a general matter, acceptable methods of public disclosure for purposes of Regulation FD will include press releases distributed through a widely
circulated news or wire service, or announcements made through press conferences or conference calls that interested members of the public may attend or
listen to either in person, by telephonic transmission, or by other electronic transmission (including use of the Internet). The public must be given adequate
notice of the conference or call and the means for accessing it. The regulation does not require use of a particular method, or establish a "one size fits all"
standard for disclosure; rather, it leaves the decision to the issuer to choose methods that are reasonably calculated to make effective, broad, and
non-exclusionary public disclosure, given the particular circumstances of that issuer. Indeed, we have modified the language of the regulation to note that the
issuer may use a method "or combination of methods" of disclosure, in recognition of the fact that it may not always be possible or desirable for an issuer to
rely on a single method of disclosure as reasonably designed to effect broad public disclosure.
We believe that issuers could use the following model, which employs a combination of methods of disclosure, for making a planned disclosure of material
information, such as a scheduled earnings release:
First, issue a press release, distributed through regular channels, containing the information;70
Second, provide adequate notice, by a press release and/or website posting, of a scheduled conference call to discuss the announced results, giving
investors both the time and date of the conference call, and instructions on how to access the call; and
Third, hold the conference call in an open manner, permitting investors to listen in either by telephonic means or through Internet webcasting.71
By following these steps, an issuer can use the press release to provide the initial broad distribution of the information, and then discuss its release with
analysts in the subsequent conference call, without fear that if it should disclose additional material details related to the original disclosure it will be engaging
in a selective disclosure of material information. We note that several issuer commenters indicated that many companies already follow this or a similar
model for making planned disclosures.72
In the Proposing Release, we stated that an issuer's posting of new information on its own website would not by itself be considered a sufficient method of
public disclosure. As technology evolves and as more investors have access to and use the Internet, however, we believe that some issuers, whose websites
are widely followed by the investment community, could use such a method. Moreover, while the posting of information on an issuer's website may not
now, by itself, be a sufficient means of public disclosure, we agree with commenters that issuer websites can be an important component of an effective
disclosure process. Thus, in some circumstances an issuer may be able to demonstrate that disclosure made on its website could be part of a combination
of methods, "reasonably designed to provide broad, non-exclusionary distribution" of information to the public.73
We emphasize, however, that while Rule 101(e) gives an issuer considerable flexibility in choosing appropriate methods of public disclosure, it also places a
responsibility on the issuer to choose methods that are, in fact, "reasonably designed" to effect a broad and non-exclusionary distribution of information to
the public. In determining whether an issuer's method of making a particular disclosure was reasonable, we will consider all the relevant facts and
circumstances, recognizing that methods of disclosure that may be effective for some issuers may not be effective for others. If, for example, an issuer
knows that its press releases are routinely not carried by major business wire services, it may not be sufficient for that issuer to make public disclosure
solely by submitting its press release to one of these wire services; the issuer in these circumstances should use other or additional methods of dissemination,
such as distribution of the information to local media, furnishing or filing a Form 8-K with the Commission, posting the information on its website, or using a
service that distributes the press release to a variety of media outlets and/or retains the press release.
We also caution issuers that a deviation from their usual practices for making public disclosure may affect our judgment as to whether the method they have
chosen in a particular case was reasonable. For example, if an issuer typically discloses its quarterly earnings results in regularly disseminated press releases,
we might view skeptically an issuer's claim that a last minute webcast of quarterly results, made at the same time as an otherwise selective disclosure of that
information, provided effective broad, non-exclusionary public disclosure of the information.74 In short, an issuer's methods of making disclosure in a
particular case should be judged with respect to what is "reasonably designed" to effect broad, non-exclusionary distribution in light of all the relevant facts
and circumstances.
Good discussion of Regulation FD at:
http://www.smartmoney.com/onthestreet/index.cfm?story=200010191
After reading I don't see in reason new regulation should stiffle Rich from doing his Views from the Bridge!
-srs
Madhatter, are these SD/FD guidelines something new or have they always been there? I wonder if McBride is becoming conservative in his communications because he already knows that AMEX listing has been approved and will be made public very soon? Just wondering and hoping.....
Oh yeah. I'll give you one share of SEVU per Firestone tire......I need some new fenders on my tugboat....Do you think they are safe for this? -SRS
I agree. I don't see how SD (selective disclosure to analysts) applies to McBride's Views on website. But he used the term "new FD guidelines". Does FD stand for full disclosure? Has anybody heard anything about new disclosure guidelines? If not, I wonder if this has something to do with AMEX listing in very short term? -srs
F+G, What a shame not to get the View's in longer. What are the FD guidelines Rich referred to? -SRS
Crookk, I didn't understand your post. What makes you believe it will be 12-14 days to be listed? I guess I missed something. Can you explain ? -SRS
Crystal, I don't know what happened with Mike Ditka deal, but learned from e-mail inquiry with SEVU's investor relations that the infomercial is not running at this time. They are proceeding cautiously because they want to avoid the problem of "lack of production speed when the orders start coming in." Also 100k production run is "set in place currently and most likely will begin in the near future." They also stated that the price increase was so that they could "maximize currently" on recent interest in the product. (Quotations are their specific words.)
In my opinion, the PR's are a product of Rich McBride, who like several successful entrepreneurs with whom I have previously worked, have a tendency to focus on the big picture in many of their dealings. They come away from positive meetings feeling like it is a "done deal" and report it so. However, the details are often very complex and take a lot of time to be completed before they lead to actual production and sales. And sometimes the complexities even prevent the deals from being completed. Don't get me wrong, I am not knocking Rich McBride. In fact it is this type of entrepreneural spirit and leadership that attracted me to invest in this company.
You ask "Should I be worried?" Well, that depends on your belief in the product and your investment time frame. IMO, if you plan to hold SEVU for the long term, the contracts and details will get worked out and because of a great product line will eventually result in big revenues. Profitability will grow as the company and its management matures. The share price, which ultimately will depend on the company's earnings, has held up quite well over the last six months' bear market. That has been very encouraging to me. As the stock market improves, and especially if SEVU goes on the AMEX, share price could climb significantly as more investors learn about the company and its products. Of course in the short run, the price may fall if short term investors get too impatient and dump their shares. As an investor, you will have to make your own decision and then live with it. I for one believe that SEVU is as good a long term investment as you could find. So you can go ahead a worry a little like me, but I'd hang in there for the long run.
All of this is JMHO. -SRS
IMO all these sales projections are just a way of exercising our fantasies. The issue isn't how many secureview units can be sold by Radio Shack, JC Penny, or even the infomercials. But rather, how many can be produced in what time frame.
The product works, it is unique, and represents a very real improvement when compared to existing security systems. When people see it demonstrated they want it. The market potential for this product is huge, probably over two million units per year.
The real issue is how long will it take for SEVU to get production levels up to meet the market demand. I have no doubt that Radio Shack, if properly supplied with product, could easily sell the first 100,000 unit production run with Reptron/K-Byte. So what we really need to know is where is SEVU with high volume production. Is K-Byte producing yet? This was originally scheduled back in July, then delayed to make product improvements, but we are now moving into mid-October. It would be nice if SEVU could give us some definitive information about production.
This will be the factor that most enfluences the immediate value of our investment. -srs
DK, it would be great if you are right, but I am not sure. They probably use distribution hubs for RadioShack/Realislic labeled products, but I doubt if they stock brand name bigger ticket items in hubs. Would be too expensive for them and not the way more efficient appliance retailers do it these days. Just guessing though....
My hope is that SEVU settles on a strategy and gets their house in order to support that strategy. They should have a tremendous 2001, but this kind of strategy move in October is too late to reap much out of the XMAS 2000 retailing frenzy. Time will tell.
FG, projections are fine, but IMO it will take at least a year to set up 2000 new dealers. And Radio Shack franchisees won't tolerate SEVU's possible problems in stocking their stores. Forgive me, but this raises a big question in my mind, and I hope Bulldop doesn't call me basher for raising it, but here goes:
What happened to the original strategy of direct consumer sales to build product awareness via infomercials before going into the lower margin retail stores? This sounded like a sound strategy when faced with mass production issues and the lower profit of going through resellers. Also if demand already is outstripping supply and response is to raise retail price, why add 2000 Radio Shack stores? It seems like McBride is flip-flopping all over the place on his strategy as revealed in PR's. Makes you wonder if there will be some new strategy next week. This investor is very confused, the direction seems to change with every new PR.
I also think company is overdo in needing a strong CFO to get financial information in order. Has the issue of shares outstanding ever been resolved? Jump from 12.6 milion to 14.4 million shares with no explanation is troubling. Is more unexplained dilution coming? Is so, how much?
I am still long and strong (30K shares) with SEVU, and believe that they eventually will prove to be a big winner since they obviously have a better mousetrap, but these questions need resolution. -SRS
Johnny1, I use a cable modem and have very little delays on IHUB - maybe occassional 10 to 15 second delays in screen updates. But this is worth it in comparison to RB where you have to wade through all the bashing krap!
Hang in there, maybe your work has some sort of firewall which slows things down a bit? -SRS
Noticed that you have two underwater cameras. To what use do you apply them? Fishing? Boat maintenance? I am curious as I am looking for a good camera for fishing? Have you ever trolled them on a down rigger? -srs
I don't know about relationship between two companies; F+G says Seaviewer is licensed to use Seaview's camera/electronics. However, in looking at Seaviewer's info on product it appears they use SEVU's electronics, but may have made some modifications for deeper water application (tested to 1000 ft vs. SEVU's 400 ft), improved on the high speed trolling stability (recessed lens with fluting and larger stabilizer wings with grommets for weights and release clips). They also mention better cable. Seaviewer costs more, but may be a better underwater/trolling setup. On Seaviewer's advantage page I am not sure if SEVU is product #3 (S) or #4 (S-V).
Since I plan to buy an underwater camera for use in my fishing charter business I will do some checking with both companies later this week and let you know what I find out. Regardless of what I learn about the underwater cameras, I believe the investment future with SEVU is much better with the huge market for the Secureview cameras.
Has anybody else compared Seaviewer vs. Seaview underwater camera products? Any thing you have learned would be helpful to me.
I looked back at charts and today was highest day since March 1. During January and February when stock did its big run up, trading volume ran between 300K and 600K per day numerous times (at least according to my charts on Fidelity.)
Yup!..srs
FG, thanks for taking the time to educate us.
Perhaps like others who have been buying as much SEVU as we can afford (hopefully not to lose), I was stopped in my tracks by the ZSUN post that really threw a lot of dirt on you. After reading it, and with the SEVU stock at $8, I stopped buying with doubts in my mind as to what is going on here. But then this morning I read your reply and your side of the story, and now have a better understanding. I am back to viewing SEVU at $8 as a fantastic opportunity. The reasons for investing in SEVU are solid: great products, great CEO, great marketing plan,......a great future that will take some time to build out. The math works on this one. I believe $25 to $40 by end of 2000 and over $100 by end of 2001, even if they fall short of their lofty projections!
Sometime back on the RB board I had asked you to help me better understand the shorter/basher's game. You replied that it would take to much time and too many volumes to teach me. Well, this was lesson #1 and I appreciate it. I still do not fully understand how the shorters profit from the falling stock price, and how the AMEX will prevent this. Can you or anybody else enlighten me? Also, do the shorters only target companies with big price runs such as seen with ZSUN and SEVU?
I am glad you view the bashers of SEVU as just amateurs...because these people can really do some serious damage, in some cases perhaps irreversible damage, to a company and its investors.
Tell me this, in your opinion, with the daily volume averaging close to 50K shares, who do you think is selling? Is it just individual investors who have lost confidence and are taking a profit (or minimizing losses) believing that price will fall further? Or do think it is insiders cashing in, such as those who received shares during reverse merger or in trade for services performed for Seaview? And how far can the price be "walked" down like this? I know nobody can predict the future, just looking for opinions from those more knowledgable than me in these matters.
Bigbizz, Madhatter, LaShark, and I are going to be glad here in a few months that we hocked the farm to buy this company's shares at 8 and 9. I'll buy you a drink of lemonade at the next stockholder's meeting.
I don't think it can fall much more before the BIG climb, but I'll be buying more if it does. -SRS
Sevu at $8 per share, with latest "from the bridge"...It's time to buy if you have the right attitude.
"a pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty"
- Sir Winston Churchill
This is a test to see if IH is back up.