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.
Its at the company website..http://www.rxdrugsafe.com/product/rx-safedose-2/
I think the keys here is that this product serves a $7B dollar healthcare sub-market that existing products shelf life is only 12 months. 6 million PCA pumps? Works with most PCA manufacturers pumps? Helps prevent overdose and misuse? Only product of its kind? Very smart lady!
$RXSF News looks good!
I am guessing you are not a paid in shareholder of RXSF. When you tell a story, tell the whole story. When you point to stock sales in a prior company, show how 4 times the amount of those sales was put back into that company by those playa's. Why not point to the $10's of millions of dollars they lost personally in that venture? Point to the $14M in revenues they generated in their first year for their first product, point to the successful partnering agreements with MasterLock, Sentrysafe, etc........point to how they built an IP portfolio.........but when you refer to them as "Lorraine and Mark" and point to only certain facts, sure seems awfully personal to me. So when a Fortune Brands company like MasterLock contracts with them to put its iconic brand name on several of their home security products, much of what you say is irrelevant.
Well, I hope that SMME does in fact file its K before the extension deadline, I hope there is something in there that points to its IP portfolio so shareholders can rely on it, and I hope they do introduce their card soon. You have misinterpreted my intent. I just wanted to be shown that all of the things they claim are true and can be backed up with facts. They haven't been backed up yet, but that doesn't mean they won't. I find it very funny how everyone digs their heels in and spats of reciting PR without any proof.
Are you part of the negative innuendo campaign? These are insiders, directors and officers. Show me the 144 filings!!!!! NOT.
IMHO, if the bids firm up at .015 or higher, this will take off. Same old MM's here, playing games. We need a few new MM's to put pressure on them!
This could be good. 3 market makers. No one knows about this company yet!
I'm having a problem understanding your point here. I looked through all the filings and all of the relationships were disclosed going back to their original S1 filing in 2014. So whats you're point? I can see if they weren't disclosed, or better yet, even audited, but they were. You seem to to want to draw negative innuendo by your posts. I can't believe you are a paid in shareholder.
IMHO, I think the bigger story here is the use of this technology to improve medication access and safe use. I can't find any other company doing this in healthcare. I am hoping once the healthcare industry becomes aware of this company and its application of technology to drug security, things will improve.
Yes, most pending Patent Applications are publlished as well, but there is a lot of prior art that its doubtful, even a secret application would overcome. I concentrate ONLY on the biometrics piece, because frankly, thats the ONLY technology that COULD set this companies product apart, and thats what I know very well.
Bilboo, do you really want me to take off the gloves? Really? Because IT WILL BE embarrassing. I won't do that now, but I will point to something else. The ONLY Patent Applications under "Colin's" name are as follows:
7,083,095 Full-Text System for automatic connection to a network
6,959,860 Full-Text System for automatic connection to a network
6,792,464 Full-Text System for automatic connection to a network
NONE of them A) have been assigned to SMME other than the 464 patent, B) licensed by SMME or otherwise are permitted to use LEGALLY by SMME unless I am missing something in the filings, which I invite you to show me directly, by date, page etc.....
NONE of these patents have anything to do, not even remotely, with biometrics. These all have to do with transaction protocols and systems of communications between a SMART CARD and a processing platform. NOT BIOMETRICS.
So again, this is nothing more than misdirection.
Prove it with evidence based facts, not PR and speculation. If its not in the filings, its not happening.
Unfortunately, the truth hurts. Unless you are citing that USAF patent and claiming that SMME somehow has rights to it, STOP MISDIRECTING the conversation. Equally disturbing is you insinuating and passively aggressively somehow placing BLAME on Andrea. She is a big girl and a well respected attorney, and guess what......if its NOT in the filings.......THEN IT DOESN'T EXIST. She is doing her job by fully disclosing everything the company is required to - and NOTHING IS DISCLOSED. They aren't hiding behind any trade secrets, or secretly developed technologies - if its NOT in the FILINGS it doesn't exist. PERIOD.
None. Sorry Bale Out. Their news isn't supported by their filings. Its as simple as that. Cut a deal with VISA and MC and BALE OUT the H2O, and this may have a chance.
Guess reading the filings doesn't mean anything. Its all in the companies filings. Take your time and read them.
Read the filings - the company has an exclusive license under this patent.
Because Andrea represented one of my other companies. I know her WELL. And she is NOT an IP attorney, if thats where you were heading.
Looks like SMME will now have to PAY VISA to allow its "purported" card to be used. I am sure CHAYA has ignored what all of the biometric experts have been telling her, or she is just such a gifted engineer, visionary/developer, that she does;t need VISA protocols. Either way, this is the beginning of the end IMHO, no matter how you want to spin this.
Unless that id, SMME is the development partner, and if thats the case, BRAVO CHAYA! Yea. Right!
I said months ago the way to approach this market is to partner with a leader, not build it and they will come.
http://mobileidworld.com/visa-biometric-specification-emv-9151/
Not at all, but if a US public company owns one, or licensed one, its MANDATORY that is disclosed within 3 business days of obtaining that interest. I could;t find ANYTHING in ANY of their REQUIRED disclosures. So stop guessing and point to evidence, or just sit back and wait.
Then this company would be extremely foolish to develop and "mass manufacture" this card without a properly filed or acquired patent, which I can;t find. Can you? Guessing isn't knowing now, is it.
Fight a battle? First, Andrea's firm is not an IP firm, thats specialized. She is a small cap BB company attorney and firm. Second, the patent in question is not only issued, but has another 10 years remaining on it. I am sure this other CEO is just waiting for the right time when she knows Chaya will be forced to deal with her, or she might have serious issues bringing the SMME card to market. Providing its really exists.
Todays press says more of the same, and again, until the company discloses by law, what its suppose to disclose, I will watch this unfold.
Mr. NG resigned. That can't be good. He was IWAL's connection to Next Biometrics.
I know Andrea Cataneo VERY WELL. She is a good attorney, but a LOT of small cap companies use her and her firm in NY (She is originally from Jersey). Her legal work in corporate filing is very good - and she will only put in there what the company can prove that have........well, guess whats NOT in those filings? Believe me, legally, if it were true, there would be several 8K's and also disclosed in the Q's and K.
I get that Bilboo, but having a "really good" patent attorney on board does nothing unless the company has FILED and DISCLOSED IP. Other than the 464 patent it doesn't. In fact, the 464 patent could;t even cover biometrics if OBAMA himself said it did. Its just not there Bilboo. So, again, prove to SHAREHOLDERS through legally required DISCLOSURES that what they have been saying all along is true. Its their burden and legal obligation to prove it, not mine.
Really? How does one say they hold several biometric patents, yet none of their LEGAL SEC disclosures show them? How does the USPTO not have any filings or assignments of biometric patents for SMME or any related person or company? How is the "mass manufacturer" not revealed if there really is a signed manufacturing agreement? How do people on this board profess to know what this company is doing when the fact is there is no PROOF what YOU say or allude to is true?
These are simple questions. Maybe Chaya has an "in" with the biometric gods of Andor. Maybe some day the company will disclose (technically they have 3 days to disclose material events).
Like I said, I asked questions, asked for you to direct me to proof - and ALL of you have come to this forum with NOTHING. THATS a FACT. Prove me wrong, and show me otherwise. Legally filed documents, SEC disclosures. Something other than a bunch of paid former brokers saying so.
Yea, patent searches go back almost 100 years BILBOO and you can still search ALL patents by type, name, owner, assignor, assignee, and boolean word searches (text). Yea, there's nothing remotely possible to link SMME with a prior issued biometric patent and the 464 patent that the court basically said was worthless as its applied to financial transactions. Just answer my questions and I am sure shareholders will be happy.
BTW - I see that the Press Releases that said SMME holds several biometric patents that WAS on this page has now been taken off. Was I right then, is that why my post was deleted by an administrator?
This companies valuation is a complete joke. Not a single working product or a single SALE in almost a decade. And it carries a $20M+ market cap? And when you ask questions you are greeted with disdain and "how dare you?" or misdirected or told to prove your position first?
I can't wait to see the next public disclosure.
Which 4 patents? Normally, when issued they are 10 or 20 years depending on the type.
I am pretty SURE that this company is already on the radar.
Thanks to Bilboo and his "swipes" (pun intended) at me, I actually found out some interesting data. ZWIPE licensed a patent from that Oslo-Norway biometric sensor company that he mentioned, which IS THE PATENT for biometrics fingerprint usage on a credit/debit/POS card, inclusive of power management. You see, the executives hired by that Oslo-Norway company CAME FROM AUTHENTEC when it was purchased by APPLE. That company took the remaining technology Apple didn't want, and came up with a new type of sensor that doesn't include silicon. There is no chance in hell, IMHO, that SMME can even apply for a patent for biometrics on a card - maybe power management alone, or EMV protocol structures, but not integrating biometrics on the card. Period. ZWIPE did things properly - they licensed the rights to use that IP on their card, and ANY card issuer that uses ANY OTHER COMPANY'S card will have to deal with ZWIPE. Just like the Medical USB Flash Drive (thats whats its called technically - not a keyring), where another company developed and patented the technology, and it seemed that (SEEMED) that SMME just copied it thinking YOU GUYS would;t know ant better.
I could be wrong, but what I am saying can be easily verified, and I am NOT doing THAT for you. So stock promoters, beware - I am letting you know that you cannot hype a company blindly and probably, as former stock brokers - you should do your research and not rely on what a company tells you it has.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but a company called bioMETRX owns THAT patent, and that has been assigned to another biometric company. The fact is THAT patent is specifically for EMR's on a biometric protected (USB) thumb drive - and THAT patent was issued in 2003, so,....SMME has nothing by way of IP that could even protect it. Its more probable that CHAYA saw this other company's product and decided to copy it after the fact. There is NO biometric IP for the card, or the thumb drive that SMME has filed, claimed, or otherwise, whether it itself, or from a third party - because I KNOW the companies that OWN that IP.
glenc - SMME has absolutely NO biometric intellectual property approved, filed or even licensed that can be found either in filed SEC disclosures or at the USPTO. This simply is a company that is integrating technology that it doesn't have any rights to and is probably hoping this product hits, then everyone will want to work with her. And thats now both domestic and international IP. Thats a kind of stupid strategy. Forget the transaction processing for the moment - even MC couldn't care less - but the underlying "PR" and CHAYA'S mantra highlights biometrics on this card, claiming that SMME "developed" the smallest fingerprint reader............. So again, where is the proof that they even remotely not only have developed this technology, but has the rights to manufacture it and use it in commerce. Its amazing how many Kool-Aid drinkers here have given this company a free pass when a simple filed document can answer all the questions.
Is this a company that has spent $20M to develop this technology?, because had it, it would have secured ALL of the patents and licensing rights from the companies that OWN them, and then would build the product. This woman is a fool and those following her even more foolish. Even Authentec spent 7 years and $30M in developing its finger sensors (and thats ALL they sold). CHAYA appears to be using the credibility of biometric security as if she was the first one to think about using it. There are (were) no less than 4 other companies in the late 90's that have done this successfully. And don't try to misdirect this post by saying...."oh no, its the power consumption of the technology....or the foundation of the transactional piece".....yea, thats what the 464 patent is all about - but it has NOTHING to do with biometrics or security. Just a process on conducting the transaction.
So what is it then? because this affects my investment.
It even says in reciting a press release from 2014 ABOVE (on this site) that the company "holds several biometric patents". Not that I can see or find, and I am pretty good at finding those things. In other peoples names? There has to be a legally filed assignment at the USPTO. There isn't. So is it a lie? Show me. Don;t try to misdirect me.....show me.
Guess I really should live in the "show me" state, but alas, getting ready to really freeze this winter.
Guess time will tell and reveal everything everyone is thinking. I hope all of you are right, you've been with this company much longer than I have and must have already seen the fruits of all those engineering years and dollars. I haven't, at least not yet anyway. But getting back to the patent, there are several companies that offer or are developing products that infringe on it. Until this "card" makes its appearance and is tested, that C&D will stay in that CEO's drawer. Maybe CHAYA's a genius in more than one way.......let's hope for this company's sake, its the right way.
Its not my place to. I don't represent that company. I am sure that will be handled through its attorneys. But I believe you can find it by using a simple patent search. If not, and you want to continue to turn a blind eye and not look for actual answers, I guess you will just find out officially in due course. I am NOT against this company - I am against owning stock in a company that may be violating other combines patents and one that seems to fail to disclose material contracts and events, but has no problem putting releases out and creating hope on air.
I am a stockholder with knowledge and understanding of the biometric industry. I know all about manufacturing biometric electronic components, power modulation, flash memory, processing capabilities, power management - in fact, I know everything there is to know about biometrics. I have been in this industry for over 20 years. I am asking questions based on facts that I know - SEC requirements of disclosure - Patents held by other biometric-based companies - technology - and CEO's. I ask questions that NEVER get answered directly whether its from BILBOO or the company. Always in a round about way. I say put up or shut up. Enough money has been invested in this company 4 times over to be able to demonstrate a real product - WHERE IS IT? Or will it be released but never shown or used because its SO SECRETIVE? How can ANY investor buy into all of this AIR? And those of you claiming to support the company, how do I know you are not some IR contracted hacks that will do or say anything to make this sound better than it actually is.
If, and that s BIG "IF", this company has what it claims to have, CHAYA would have been able to raise more than $25M to actually have a real company and a real financing partner behind her. There is no secret to the technology, there is no secret as to how the technology works, a manufacturer is not a guarded secret - there is no secret as to how CHAYA wants this card to work. I'm from Missouri - SHOW ME!
Ok, so like I said previously, while the 464 Patent may have some value, the scope within which this card is being used ("on board biometrics and battery powered") completely infringes upon another companies Patent. You can't hide behind a product that is only "partially" covered by a Patent or Patent Application. If they take the biometrics off the card, then there won't be any issues. However, I think there may be a huge issue once this card hits the market. Thats al I am saying. I am convinced that SMME has no IP regarding its use of biometrics, especially the way they claim it will be used. They may have developed their on sensor, their own algorithm, their own power source, but the way the card uses biometrics, it completely violates another patent owned by another company. Just saying.
Hmmmm, "Transferring Manufacturing"......what exactly does THAT mean? Some more broken english or misnomers. Actually, when you set up lines with a NEW manufacturer, you sign a NEW contract with a NEW entity who will develop manufacturing protocols in order to be ISO and other certification compliant. They would expect a minimum commitment in order to undertake fabrication of the molds ($$$$$), design electronic component test plans ($$$$$), run a few thousand test products (more $$$$$$$), etc......... I would think that the "cat" is already out of the bag on this one, especially since the failed lawsuit. Transferring manufacturing......I guess CHAYA is trying to sound "official".
Are you guys that foolish to believe there is no requirement to disclose this within 3 days of executing agreements for something like that? Thats not a trade secret, its information REQUIRED BY THE SEC to inform investors of FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS that company obligates itself to. What a freakin' circus this is. The financial commitment for a project that uses a contract manufacturer to "mass produce' is at vey least, a multi-million dollar commitment REQUIRING and 8K to be filed within 3 days...........that is.......unless......there really isn't any agreements. At least that would explain the apparent failure to comply with disclosure requirements.