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.
the MM's got some more work to do, I guess.
I would agree if we actually close at .01+ for more than a few days in a row. Even more so if we get news of funding or contracts for more than a few BIB's. Otherwise, it's just the usual WSGI trading machine. I am just watching a FOX news segment on the FAA working on integrating drones into the airspace so maybe this is in sympathy?
More NIE 14.2 info. It looks to be a pretty involved process.
http://www.dvidshub.net/news/125407/nie-142-assess-coalition-force-integration-teaming-with-bold-quest#.U0gwWY1OWM9
This article is more NIE related than WSGI related, but it does give a higher level understanding of the mindset behind the NIE process and why the decisions are not as rapid as we would like them to be.
http://www.army.mil/article/123076/Network_After_Next/
...or the GTEL logo on the racecar EOM
yup - nothing on PACER other than what Bear posted.
Good point about the IR. They have engaged PR firms in the past, but nothing that stuck long term. It would have been nice to see some sort of PR summary of the year in review and Argus progress. They are going to need to do something to sustain a .01+ shareprice otherwise it is back to the Pinks due to the new trading rule. Maybe they feel the only PR's that need to be shared involve closing deals and not necessarily the day to day stuff at least until the time when a sizable order comes through to put us on the radar.
be_real, I was just thinking it would be nice if the shareholders could get a glimpse of this. It doesn't even need to be a formal invite for me. Just tell me where to park, what direction to look, and at what time. I'll grab some Skyline Chili on the way and it could be a fun day.
Another take on that "baseline" term:
"The two WASPs will be returning to NIE 14.2 as a “Baseline
System” following their successful mission at NIE 14.1 where they were a “System Under Evaluation,” the difference being that now the WASP system will be used to test other new systems."
Will we get invited to this?
"Two Argus One demos are planned at the USIC this year in conjunction with the Ohio/Indiana UAS Center and Test Complex. One demo will highlight the new ducted fan/vectored thrust propulsion system presently under development and the other will
be for congressional staff. We anticipate Certificates of Authorization will be secured for these events through the Ohio/Indiana UAS Center and Test Complex, allowing for untethered operation."
lol - ok 2. Yes, I think there would be ongoing support, and consumables which all cost money. Not sure how munch inventory they would keep on hand. Plus it becomes standard equipment, they probably need some domestically for training beyond the NIE exercises. Heck indy, lets just settle on Mad's 3000 units :)
Come to think of it...there was an order for 6 aerostats and 1 or 2 launchers at one point so maybe 6 per brigade?
My guess is that we might end up with an order for 6 WASP systems. I am not good enough or patient enough to post all the links that I googled just now, but I think the testing that is going to happen in NIE 14.2 is for the benefit of finalizing Capability Set 14 which will be deployed to 6 brigades over the next year. These CS sound like total comm packages using the new technology they are working to integrate during these exercises at Bliss and White Sands.
Nothing but inference on my part. I wish there was a shopping list of what was in the Capability Sets for further proof but I couldn't find one.
I hope the 10-k can clarify what the company is doing so we can get a handle on the big picture.
Thanks Sami. Like a walk down memory lane.
250 mile range and 120 mile LOS...and that is with two year old technology.
I can't remember what the range of the Argus is...does anyone remember?
In theory, could they release a swarm of UAV's to assist the search effort for Flight 370 and blanket a larger area with real-time imaging vs. the delayed sat images that they are using? There was mention of tech used to tell when a patch of dirt was disturbed for possible IED planting, so why not have some sort of tech for detecting debris in the sea?
I am surprised that UAV's have not been mentioned much.
yes, be_real. there are other docs on Pacer that contain each side's argument. LJC wants this dismissed, WsGi presents argument about why it should not. LJC responds with further arguments for their case....back and forth, repeat, etc.
I doesn't look like mediation went anywhere last year, WSGI would prefer a jury trial, LJC would prefer a bench trial. nothing too exciting.
Indy, can you help me to understand the tech described in the patent?
So there is a mechanism in between each segment that constricts and expands the links for increased rigidity or flexibility between segments which affects wind resistance.
Also, does this affect the ambient air around the front and back of the bladder to control lift properties between the front and back of each segment? If this is the case, I can understand the concept of rise and descent of each segment. But what about the turning left and right? Can bladders control the roll which can affect turning or is turning controlled through the motor at the head?
Nice to hear your positive opine on the Argus. I hope the consortium is seeing some commercial potential from the research and that the shareholders can learn more about the tech as it progresses in development.
It's a link for an EXCEL spreadsheet so you need an appropriate program to open it. It's a pricing bid that amounts to 160K for the BIB and training plus the list of consumables/repair parts for another 24K.
be_real, yes those are still listed plus there is a hearing scheduled on 4/2. Who will blink first? WSGI seems to be confident that LJC did not support their fiduciary duty, but what will the court think if it gets that far?
WSGI filed their response today to LJC's motion to dismiss. WSGI is arguing against (obviously) so we'll see what happens next. They are not lying down here.
Yes it is be_real, and I was thinking the same thing.
be_real, that statement was actually referring to establishment of the LJC relationship from the beginning. Now, who was the SEC counsel referred to by LJC?
I included that part because LJC seemed to be implying that their relationship with WSGI, and the resulting agreements, were endorsed by SEC affiliated counsel.
LJC did respond and basically said LJC did nothing wrong and wants the case dismissed and various claims of fraud committed by LJC stricken, etc. Responses due by 3/5.
I think LJC is trying to argue that:
1) WSGI is actually in breach because they decided to exercise the True-Up component of the agreement but did make the required cash payments.
2) LJC is not obligated to the terms of the EIA because of WSGI breach.
What is interesting is the LJC states "WSG's SEC counsel recommended that WSG work with LaJolla"
Does it make sense that the incentives assigned to F. Hess were related to the invite back?
They must be pretty busy these days with all their irons in the fire. It will be exciting if we start getting some larger orders for more than just 1 or 2 test units not to mention the consumable spare items that go along with them. April-May can't come soon enough.
a.Integration of GPS functionality into the BiB-250 ISR package for use as
requested by JIEDDO;
b.Improvement of aerodynamics and stability of the BiB-250 aerostat through
proprietary enhancements to the wing design for JIEDDO; and
c.Electro-mechanical re-design of BiB-250 winch tether line path to
accommodate the possibility of an operator ingesting the tether thimble
while maintaining reliability and torque capability for large Kingfisher
aerostats for JIEDDO.
Sorry if I misunderstood, but I just remember the pic that was posted and made the assumption. At least someone was close enough to touch it.
Indy, thanks for sharing your opine about the potential for WSGI tech to get to the strat and back. Since you have looked in the box and literally stood inside the envelope, that was good to read.
http://news.discovery.com/tech/robotics/blimps-defend-washington-dc-airspace-130725.htm
Remember Dan's comment from the end of this article? So when the article says JLENS isn't the only one, does that refer to Washington or the military in general?
Hmmm is right. Published 1/9/2014. Credit to Vojtech and Erdberg.
Here is a link with the figures displayed.
http://www.google.com/patents/US20140012433
Segmented and releasable Argus on an LTAS winch system? Maybe someday?
Thank you for the report, Indy. By chance, did you get a glimpse of the tethered copter?
Follow up PACER filing. LJC response due 2/19, Case management statement due 3/11, Case management conference 3/18.
There was a new PACER filing today - LJC is switching their attorney. A filing was due tomorrow so it's a little late in the game, but WSGI had no objections. I wonder how long before it shows up on the justia.com site? Thanks for posting that BTW.
Be_, yeah we'll be guessing for a few weeks. It's not official until we hear something from the company in a PR or a K or Q filing, but since they stopped pursuing the injunction for now, something must have been proposed to end the litigation proceedings without a judge's ruling.
regarding LJC:
- Sorry, can't post a direct link since this document is from PACER which is a paid site. There used to be a poster here who was good at finding these sort of docs under public domain.
- a case management conference has been set for Jan 21, 2014.
- the court did not order this to happen, WSGI and LJC have both agreed to not enforce or attempt to enforce the terms of their agreements pending a final resolution.
- WSGI has dropped the pursuit of a restraining order and injunction.
My take is that they have settled in some manner. Terms were not listed, but I guess the choices would be to part ways or come up with better financing terms.
LJC - can't post the info via cut and paste because of Adobe but basically:
- WSGI withdrawing restraining order
- LJC and WSGI are barred from enforcing or attempting to enforce any terms of the Securities Purchase Agreement, Equity Investment agreement, or 4.75% Secured Convertible Debenture
ok....now let's sell some stuff...
I would agree at least the 250..only because the job opening from A-T solutions mentioned the BIB 250 in their requirement.
These articles are nice to see especially since they are not company fluff. Ever since seeing this posted, I am intrigued by the level of testing that must be done.
So, they used the WASP in a fixed location which is pretty self explanatory. I am curious as to how this asset was evaluated as a "here I am" beacon to the opposing forces and what sort of additional logistics and protection need to go into protection after alerting the enemy with a 1000' floating beacon. Same with the live operational asset scenario. Pulling a large balloon through hostile territory must present a whole different set of challenges. Maybe in both of these scenarios, the ability to monitor a larger area from higher up makes it easier to detect a problem further in advance than current tech?
Jump operations - does this imply dropping the WASP equipment from the sky for delivery and/or deployment?
IMO, there seems to be a lot of interest in the WASP filling the needed communications gap in NIE. Plus the last paragraph in the other article implied to me that the JRTC (BIB 250 maybe?) at Polk was happening around the time of WASP interest from NIE 14.1. The article said "coincidentally" but it just goes to affirm the speculation that there is considerable interest in LTAS technology - I hope that will translate into more significant sales once proven.
regarding LJC, this is the latest:
Set/Reset Deadlines as to 3 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order. Responses due by 12/18/2013. Replies due by 12/26/2013. Motion Hearing set for 1/8/2014 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/4/2013) (Entered: 11/04/2013)
Beats me be_real. Without an injunction, LJC can keep doing whatever they are doing and WSGI can keep sending them hundreds of thousands of shares if that is what they are doing. It's business as usual until the court says otherwise.
10-q due soon - maybe we get some sort of update on things then?
La Jolla update - filed today. Basically they are still mediating and both parties want to push the motion hearing from Dec to Jan.
I think this is related to the A-T Solutions job posting.
GSC-QF0B-13-0030
this link has a detailed Word doc for proposal request. It was marked as "cancelled" back in July.
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=52e919176391dc6341fb570c4e9fea88&_cview=0
Yet this is the award for the contract in September. Is this because the first was a general solicitation, but then they decided to add JIEDDO work for A-T as a bridge contract since they already are engaged in similar work?
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=ba7964f9364fda2a1c0d383a42e7d4b7&_cview=0
Any gov contract insight would be appreciated.
alleged electrical problem, runaway blimp...yet equipment orders have been placed and LTAS website updated. I would assume the issues have been addressed to the satisfaction of the purchasers. More orders would serve as further confirmation as well. Maybe we get some sort of update regarding whether the gov shutdown affected any of our scheduling after they reopen?