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.
your link won't work for me---keep getting internal server error msg---can you print the info, please?
guess you have your ans now, Pit---according to most posts, these deficiencies must be due to AMEX/MF/Byron, whatever--but surely not GTE.
My guess is the stock will trade today because our press release stated: "The Company believes that the trading halt will be lifted following distribution of this press release." AMEX must have indicated that or they wouldn't have stated it--and since AMEX reserves the right for change, it would have to be released as "believes." (IMHO)
Above based on the diff in CAFE's release: "The Company does not expect that the trading halt will be lifted on NASDAQ prior to the issuance of a written decision by the NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Panel, which is expected to occur following the hearing. There can be no assurance that the Panel will grant the Company’s request for continued listing or that trading will resume on NASDAQ."
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?dcn=0001017951-05-000390&Type=HTML
wow--that's great--I never saw the rebuttal--was it posted here previously? Do you have a link?
UNREAL---looks like MF feeling the same "vibes" as me re: DJ----though good ol' Seth wants a different outcome from what I've posted today!!!
msmag,
I'm just clarifying that your comment "If Dumas did put a halt AMEX perhaps he did it to DRAW SOME ATTENTION" was not what I was saying.
I believe the DJ source was right---AMEX called the halt. Possibly because of the "T1" (pending news= a "glowing" NR that AMEX refused to release w/o investigation..).
However, because GTE was sure the AMEX investigation would prove positive, a source leaked to DJ the proceedings--giving the NR (when AMEX releases) the credibility it would have lacked w/o the official "check-up" (since the NR must not involve a cash dep)
Sure would like the conjecture replaced w/ fact---same/old same/old in the GTE universe. But as Doc posted earlier, this should prove to be a defining moment for GTE....one way or the other.
The T1 code is very interesting in this whole puzzle.
We know this supposed-Dumas sentiment from Mon's DJ is true because it was same sentiment @ SH meeting: "the perceived insincerity of past press releases has recently prevented GlobeTel from issuing any more glowing releases until there's money in the bank to back up the claims."
Perhaps GTE did submit a "big" NR to AMEX for approval but not something that would have required a cash deposit (like a signed contract on a completed wireless pilot-Mexico, etc). I mean, w/o the cash, Co surely knew NOT to do that!
So the positive NR is something that could be questionable (like a progress update) and AMEX decides to investigate B4 releasing. Meanwhile, GTE is confident the NR is sound so a "source" leaks the proceedings to DJ.
Now when the NR does come out, it will have the credibility it would NOT have had w/o the AMEX investigation and DJ "used" to help disseminate that fact.
Chris Byron was NY Post and he penned purely neg. GTE press. Maxwell Murphy was DJ (who wrote last Monday's piece re: de-listing "source")---and who also wrote 2 postive articles on the RU deal B4 it all unraveled--then he continued to post objectively but w/ the skepticism the rest of the mkt shared
Mide,
IMO there was nothing in Monday's NR for AMEX to object to, hence the release.
The AMEX problem (it appears) is what Maxwell Murphy/DJ alleged: "The source tells Dow Jones Newswires the Monday afternoon press release concerning the Stratellite delay wasn't the only reason for the stock's halt. When added together, the disintegration of the increasingly tenuous partnership between GlobeTel and the mostly faceless Russian partners, coupled with a lack of any material developments to back up some of the often sensational claims the company has made, caused the powers that be at the Amex to take notice."
It's the "when added together" that's pertinent---to AMEX and to those "non-rabid" longs.
Symphyl--your post #32087 is one I hadn't thought of and seems most logical to me.
Doc--your post #32082: I heartily concur
the point that some posters were trying to make is that the extreme volume in last few minutes of tdg was NOT specific to GTE thus, not due to NR anticipation, short-covers, news leaks, etc.
Just took a quick peek at a few others I own and saw the same type of volume spike for Fri close:
IDTI http://tinyurl.com/lun3s
TXCO http://tinyurl.com/ou5rj
yes, those were my thoughts to Rob tonight too.
Good night all.
if the Strat tech is right there in the final testing stages, a monied partner like Raytheon could put our product into warp speed..............we're going to need the money from somewhere going forward, right? I would think that money would jump to buy tech in late-stage development
Am I wrong in thinking that if Raytheon truly interested, and Strat 2 in final testing stages, then Raytheon muscle and $$$ could have been used to great advantage....and yet, GTE not selected to be any part of the Raytheon team working the SBINet project (see grapes prev post:
http://tinyurl.com/glqfg)
all talk, no $$$$
Warp,
oh, how I identify w/ your comment: "There's nothing more frustrating than eagerly awaiting the live presentation of a meeting and then get nothing "
I was unable to hear the recent Cowen webcast. I didn't know I'd have a prob listening to it @ home--I use Windows Media Player alot (ie downloading tunes). When I called Cowen, I was told it was because I presently use 56K voice modem @ home---webcast needs broadband:(
BTW, can't thank you enough, Mide, for all your many efforts on SH behalf. Great job.
mr_schnizzle,
your comment "It would not surprise me in the slightest if Murdoch 'approached' GTE to do a JV" is exactly what bothers me about my long-held GTE investment: why aren't their ANY monied suitors at GTE's door?
Isn't the GTE business plan all about we've got the tech, you've got the $$$$, let's do a JV operation? How does Lowtrade's "wall" fit into that concept?
A cpl of wks ago I noticed a pink sheet telecom start-up w/ new tech--and Motorola has already thrown money at them.....
nerd86,
I don't doubt that a form letter went to all the clients of the RJFS departing IR--but it was NOT uniformly asking every acct to leave---that is highly unbelievable. A blanket letter such as I described probably went out---but that was a separate issue from other RJFS accounts that were asked to leave (if that happened).
No one at the compliance dept (the dept w/ the facts in this matter) of RJFS is going to privately discuss the matter to a caller who happens to hold an acct there (but is not a client of the departing IR).
I'm not saying you didn't call--just that somewhere the wrong dots were connected by someone.
The fact is, we don't know what the facts are in the NYP implied wrong-doings in RJFS-held accts.
siriuslyricher, your "Well, why don't you share with them the fact that the brokerage firm stated very clearly that all of the broker's clients had to seek a new brokerage"
What "fact" are you referring to? Your post of what you read on the RB?
In my considerable experience in securities "back office" procedure, I have never witnessed nor heard of the scenario described on RB re: RJFS "asked all his clinets to seek another brokerage." When a self-clearing Broker-Dealer (like RJFS) terminates their assoc and lic w/ indep broker, the BD (as custodian) usually notifies broker's customers the broker is leaving and lists their options: stay (heavily favored--unless the ACCOUNT a prob or flat rev), ACAT or T&S (auth from cust to BD re: various modes of acct transfer).
fburk,
your comment "When an employee leaves the company it is common practice to keep their 401K for only a short period of time and for that 401K to then be transferred to another account" is not exactly true. It is possible to leave your 401K assets in the same custodial acct after leaving a Co (I left mine for years in the same a/c w/ Schwab after I terminated employment w/ the Co that owned the Schwab plan. I only recently rolled over into an IRA---and I kept it @ Schwab). The custodian (brokerage firm) is not in any hurry for you to take your a/c elsewhere--they want to get and retain a/c's--they don't willingly jettison a/c's unless they produce no revenue or are a compliance problem.
The NYP allegations that most concerned me were entirely ignored in the rebuttal that GTE chose to issue. For heavens sake, once GTE chose to respond, how could they fail to address the Raymond James "fishiest sales" and the $74 mil "detoured to insiders." Why respond at all if you don't address all the allegations--or at least the most serious ones? The theories offered at RB (I don't read) and pszme are welcome but obviously not equal to an official GTE response.
Well, I agree with Mide's post 26908 today--guess I'll cont to hold my breath until 6/1 then.....GLTYA
gregmaster, I posted the same concern here yesterday re: Raymond James--you're not alone--ignore posts that try to deflect or reduce your honest queries and concerns to supposed bashings.
My concern is HOW GTE handled their response to the NYP allegations--not well: only the obvious addressed, the most pertinent ignored.
jfburk,
First, re-read my first sentence in prior post----clearly acknowledges GTE response today was to NYP, not Prensky. As far as Prensky, I don't KNOW his agenda and neither do you. I do KNOW that he went LONG when he thought the GTE RU deal would happen---REMEMBER THIS FROM PRENSKY?:
March 06, 2006
Taking the Long Side on GTE
This morning a story came from Maxwell Murphy, a Dow Jones Newswire reporter. Mr. Murphy was the reporter who intereviewed Maxim Chernizov of Internafta, who said that he was considering raising the initial payment to GlobeTel (Amex: GTE) from $150 million to $300 million.
This morning Maxwell adds to the mix a conversation he had with John Leinwald, GlobeTel's general counsel. Here's the relevant text from the article:
According to John Leinwand, GlobeTel's general counsel, the financing slated for next week will be a $300 million letter of credit, which the release said will be syndicated by several "tier one European banks." Leinwand said the financing took has taken this long because the banks had to get to know Huff and GlobeTel before releasing to the relatively unknown company funds as big as its market capitalization. A letter of credit from the banks will be used instead of a direct payment to GlobeTel from Internafta for several reasons, Leinwand said. The banks want to assure that no one firm is taking on too great a financial risk and to ensure
the funds will legally and appropriately be transferred from Internafta's accounts to GlobeTel at a measured pace the banks can control.
Leinwand said he expects the banks' names will be revealed after the financing commences, and a press release detailing the initial amounts and terms should follow announcement of the completion of the first stage next week.
People lie all the time. But when an attorney and a member of the Florida bar (I checked, he graduated from the University of Miami and was admitted to the bar in 1995) says that the deal will be structured as a letter of credit and that its' taken so long because the banks "had to get to know Huff" it lends credence to the Internafta $600 million story.
I think the odds we see a closing in the next two weeks have gone up to 40/60. Therefore fair value would be around $3.30 under my calculations; I entered a long position this morning at $3.4ish.
Second, the ALLEGED compensation to "insiders" in 5/22 NYP is in SALES---not stock option grants: "Much of the fishiest selling in GlobeTel stock seems to have originated from the Boca Raton office of the brokerage Raymond James, where several of the company's top insiders maintained accounts."
Now I have no idea what "fishiest selling" refers to---and today's GTE rebuttal also left us with no clue by failing to address the issue......which is clearly more relevant to SH than Rubikon.
We need intl. CONTRACTS...enough already with the intl. CONTACTS.
I realize many have posted their satisfaction w/ GTE's response today to NYP 5/22/06 allegations. However, I find myself reluctantly agreeing with today's Zachary Prensky/Upside Surprise comment: "GTE says a lot while saying nothing."
What about Raymond James connection? What about $74 mm in monies to insiders??????????????????
Instead, Dumas rebuttal focuses on Rubikon---well that was easy---because as Dumas stated: "Rubikon.... has never had any connection whatsoever to GlobeTel."
The one thing I can entirely agree with in GTE's response today: "Like, Mr. Byron, I can only hope that the regulatory authorities who are charged with investigating these kinds of actions will leap directly into the middle of these sordid events. It is hard to conceive that this sort of thing is allowed to occur in America."
dinotori, I'm not "connecting the dots" on your links.
Doesn't appear that MWAV a competitor (in which Prensky, his now deceased mother and his father owned a combined 243,000 shs @ 2/19/02-date of your first link--btw, didn't do any research to see what current holdings are because.....)
MWAV did purchase Jayco Ventures Inc (JVI), per their 2/28/05 PR which stated: "JVI products meet or exceed the specifications required by DIRECTV®, DISH NETWORK®, SKY®, STAR CHOICE®, and many other global satellite providers. We are really positive about JVI's products and that their team fits so well with our existing business model and that together we can grow and diversify our product lines significantly through global sourcing and virtual distribution in exciting growth industries like Satellite. Our existing experience in broadband and telecom fit very nicely with what Jason and Josh bring to us," stated Joe Turek, M-Wave, Inc. President and Chief Operating Officer."
However, per MWAV 12/31/05 10K (http://tinyurl.com/rmsg5) filed 4/17/06: "In December the Company decided to liquidate the DBS division it had purchased earlier in the year. This will be treated as a discontinued operation in financial results for the year. "
So MWAV business then continues as a virtual mfr of microwave circuit boards and their market, per 10K: "There is a large and varied market for lower to high technology digital circuit boards. The technology ranges between dual-sided circuit boards associated with applications like signaling or lighting devices to 20-plus layer boards with complex circuitry requirements associated with medical or military applications. ...Our customers are highly varied and include both contract manufacturers (CM’s) and original equipment manufacturers (OEM’s) of specific products, both within the telecom sector and in a wide range of other diverse industries including electronic warning devices, irrigation equipment and automotive consumer components. We market our products through regional sales managers supported by 20 independent sales organizations. We currently service approximately 50 customers."
Anyway, I apparently missed whatever you were seeing when you reviewed the links you provided?? (doesn't appear to me that GTE a direct, substantial competitor to MWAV @ present).
TIA. I've been away and have some serious "catching up" to do.
just sifting for FACTS, pitbull74--and no, I didn't get them...
siriuslyricher, your comment: "Seth did not even do the minimal research to discover that Huff has not been involved with Infinity since 2003."
Ques: I'm wondering if YOU have done that research?
I mean, what is the evidence to the above other than this statement made by GTE-paid IR, Bleckman?
doc80ca, would you mind posting this 3 yr chart? TIA
jfburk, re: your comment "We should be getting 1st qtr. guidance soon", we already got it (indirectly) from Dumas 3/31 SH letter. http://tinyurl.com/jrorb
IMHO, we won't get anything on Q1 until 10Q filed (by 5/15 deadline).
Pitbull, I can't entirely buy your comment "dumas really did dwarf huff with the optimistic lingo" because Dumas entirely shot down (indirectly) Huff's projected (to DJ) "Q1 break-even." We know (from Dumas 3/31 SH letter) that Voip, Magic Money, Wireless and Strat are all net loss @ 3/3l--and there's no way (imvho) CenterLine is going to compensate enough in Q1 to carry the other 4 losers. Q2 much the same for Strat, Voip, Magic Money (if lucky, MM to BE since Dumas projects pft in Q3). Ques is what will wireless provide SH in Q2, since Dumas states "at moment, our leading contender for near term pft on signif scale." I assume this means Russian deal still very much in contention and Mexico? Germany? (hopefully) next........Also, in play for Q2 is Centerline gross pfts--where will we be @ 6/30 in relation to Dumas anticipation of $500-750mm per mo by yr end?
This is why pps down and shorts cont to feel confident to add or hold their pos.
Seems our GTE mgmt (per 3/31 COB SH letter) is right on top of the business curve re: ethnic marketing.
Media tune in to ethnic audiences
Updated 4/7/2006 12:42 AM
By David Lieberman, USA TODAY
NEW YORK — Forget the Internet for a moment. One of the most intriguing new developments in media is taking place in a part of the industry that many executives used to dismiss as a backwater.
Call it the year of ethnic media, the vast collection of mostly tiny broadcasters, cable channels, newspapers and magazines that target Hispanics, Asians and other audience niches. Advertisers who once deemed ethnic audiences too small, too poor or too old to take seriously are looking at them anew as immigration rates soar.
With minority markets now accounting for nearly a third of U.S. buying power, pitching to these audiences "is no longer the nice thing to do, or the social thing to do. It's about business," says Gwen Kelly, senior ad specialist for American Family Insurance.
Spanish-language media are getting the most attention. The 2000 Census found that 12.5% of the U.S. population of more than 280 million was Hispanic — a bigger market than all of Canada — and projects the share to be nearly 18% by 2020.
Full article at http://tinyurl.com/lkjd3
Trashboy, since you're feeling "compelled" at the moment, how about explaining a little more of your "paranoia" over GTE "coincidental" relationships? Specifically what, in the 3/31 COB letter, set off your present anxiety?
Mide, I agree with you on all except "I can't but feel in the dark evil recesses of my mind, that this was all orchestrated thru the Russians for the sole purpose of taking GTE down, and Tim and all his knighted horses never saw it coming. It reminds me of Low's warning that an outside force was at play here, with evil intent."
If Tim was in this alone, the telecom whiz kid, I could consider a Russian "bad guy plot"...but Tim has a cast of stellar intl businessmen around him....and Sir Chris was previously trained specifically in Russian culture. GTE is new to intl big business, but it's management sure isn't (isn't that supposed to be our "ace in the hole?)"
Mide, I'm so glad you are continuing to contribute to this board. I too salute your past performance as board mod. A big thanks also to justfrank for agreeing to be your replacement.
and balance IR private comment re "keen interest" with this public disclosure from our COB in his 3/31 SH letter:
"Is the strategy huge and challenging? Yes. Does it seem to represent an eclectic collection of cutting-edge technology opportunities that even some institutional investors find daunting? Yes."
be careful...there's a real dichotomy at work in the American work place at present. On one end of the spectrum we have mgmt compensated 400x their associates and shareholders are led to believe that these golden, overblown compensation pakages are the legitimate cost of doing business. On the other end, American labor is being forced to a lower wage and standard of living to compete with cheap foreign labor. Why aren't globalization pressures felt on both ends of the American pay scale? Or do we just continue to inflate the already grotesque 400:1 ratio?
I'm still in the process of digesting all the GTE info we've been given (and catching up on board) so this is not a direct comment re: Co (yet) but it drives me a little nuts when SH don't think they should even QUESTION mgmt compensation......
imawswami, just got to this now. Thanks so much for your primer on search engine finesse--obviously not needed to many on this board, but to those of us that are only "self-taught," the tips are greatly appreciated.
And rdwud, stratocasterca, montanar, symphyl, Crazylegs, nilremerlin, dinotori, (sorry if I missed anyone)…such superior postings today (as someone else stated earlier)…feel like I’m in a CLASSROOM today…
can’t thank you enough for sharing with all your time, experience and information gleaned. Truly feel sorry for any GTE sh that doesn’t know or doesn’t read this board….
And now, if anyone has any tips re: "information overload" and how to handle the endless onslaught of meaningful material so rapidly harvested in this info-rich era, PLEASE SHARE. Or just tell me how to fill more hours into the day.......
imawswami, I totally agree with your statement "It may also expand/reveal the inner-investor through shared methodology, tools, etc." and find your particular search tools to be pretty incredible---thanks MUCH for what you've brought to the board.
May I ask what tool(s) you used in finding nuggets like the 3 Satellite conferences you posted for us (21782, 22602, 22685)?
This is the kind of superior info I come to this message board for. And I've learned alot from fellow posters re: "tool tips" (a recent example, post# 22719--THANKS to J563_NYY)
I also can relate to the frustration expressed in Pit's post--our endless conjecture can be wearisome (w/o Co validation) and, in our current state of limbo, could prove pointless (w/o significant, verified forward progress from GTE).
The curtain should pull back a little this week...soon we'll have some financial facts to evaluate our financial invt...should provide for good debate. GLTUA
rdwud, in general, I agree with the principal you have raised; therefore, if I step outside that which we now know we both agree, I must have had a reason to do so.
Respect is due everyone, btw, not just the mgmt you seem so presently concerned about. Peace.
Shakeyguy, I sincerely meant you no disrespect when I posted my question--and was totally oblivious to that possible interpretation. Sorry.
My only intent was to confirm the post before I sent my own email inquiry to the company.
Just a simple matter of confirming my source before I took an action of my own.
Thank you for the confirmation.
ShakeyGuy, you have broken a cardinal rule of Rob's re: cut n paste his emails to message boards.
That aside, please verify, before I email Huff, that what you have posted is indeed exactly what Bleckman wrote to you.
Please confirm asap.
Thanks.
Lowtrade, you are THE best. And THANK YOU for your tireless commentary, your most excellent game calling and TA. Wish I could do a "Spock mind meld" with you! LOL and again, thanks MUCH.
thank you, itsjustme. That's the very type of data that s/b officially updtd to shareholders and not dependent upon emails and msg boards...don't you think? I suspected that might have been the case....but again, why leave it up to anyone's mere conjecture? Geez, just give us the facts in a straightforward manner, that's all I'm asking from a Co that I believe in too...but not blindly.
siriuslyricher re: "Why are you telling us about these projects if you don't have a contract yet"?
Well, here is (just) one place we could use a progress report from Co.
Almost 9 mos ago, 8/1/05 we had this PR: "GlobeTel Wireless Announces New Contract to Provide Wireless Networks for Three German Cities"..... which DID incl a contract (??) and the statement "Construction of the project is to begin in August 2005."
http://investor.globetel.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=67726&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=737840&highligh...
If we're now contracting to do 30 cities in Russia, where exactly are we on the 3 in Germany from 8/1/05?
Anyway, I'm just demanding transparency--each must decide on their own evaluation and risk tolerance whether it's "beef." I can accept failures, IF I know what created them and how it affects the future. I can accept delays, IF I'm told the reason and the remedy. What I can't accept is the present info vacuum leading to wild conjectures--both good and bad---and the constant state of uncertainty that the lack of info creates.
If Huff is certain enough to state to DJ the following on 2/9/06, then just give us the facts which support this enthusiasm so we can be there too: "Major progress toward a bright and profitable future will be clear this quarter, he says, with "substantial gains" in all the company's businesses." Note that "this quarter" ends 3/31/06--with a report deadline which extends to 5/15/06....that's a long time to wait for details on what was already purported to be just a "break even quarter" per Huff to DJ on 1/26
http://webreprints.djreprints.com/1397170348173.html
Thank you Logandean for this TRUTH stated by Pete: "Sure there are things that must be held close to the vest but when someone makes a commitment or a promise, they must account for that commitment or promise. It doesn't just disappear."
The comfort/investment objective is NOT to be found in the choice of the two options previously posted: "PR's long on promise vs long on performance...period....or you'll hear nothing." No. Shareholders are looking for exactly what Steven D pinpointed and Pete expressed: transparency. Progress reports not promises...and if "nothing" = non-performance (or no fwd progress) on ALL burners, that is hardly a reassurance that all is well w/ our investment.
No one should ever be afraid of truth---and who can give it to us better than our Co? It's the absence of info that gives the Seth's of the world so much room for their negative conjectures. I can't believe how the simple quest for facts---not promises, not guarantees, just a straightforward progress update from the Co---is twisted by some to = bashing. What is up with that?