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.
Bosox,
I can only hope something positive will happen; the situation is promising but that is not the same as a signed contract and a great PR.
Only time will tell if this potential becomes reality, IMHO. I am like the rest of the investors and am forced to wait.
Pervasip VVoIP Opportunities . . .
how many companies in the links below need to move from their old style networks to a VVoIP capable network to maintain competitiveness as the Big Guys look to eat their lunch? (think verizon vs frontier; there is an excellent article outlining just that issue when frontier bought verizon assets)
How many want it done inexpensively? And, how many want a superior product so that they can one-up the Skype competition and make them look better than the "Big Guy"?
How many want patent protection as a corporate policy?
Link >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adams_Cable
(look in the purple box at the bottom of the page; select "show" on the right if you need to)
Link >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_telephone_companies
BY THE WAY, THIS LISTING DOES NOT INCLUDE INTERNATIONAL OPPORTUNTIES!
How does Pervasip Benefit . . . .
Above all, I believe Paul Riss's assessment of the capital efficiency of the Pervasip award winning network design and implementation.
Second, I speculate that there really are large deals Paul Riss alluded to as being so large that the risk of closure actually is diminished.
Third, I speculate that there is a good working relationship between Pervasip and Wgat, and that the two combined support closing these large potential accounts. Wgat has its technology and Pervasip provides/implements/supports the required VVoIP overlay network . . . the right and left hand wash each other.
Please see my other answer to your question for important additional perspective.
Link>> http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64905467
What is the Patent's Value . . .
As a long, I want to say an obscene dollar amount, especially when Skype went for $8.5B (about $25pps for Wgat) and the quality is not there, it does not control its own core P2P code and therefore can't improve the quality, and it is still loosing more than $7M a year. But the reality is: the value is dependent upon how important the patent is to the VVoIP technical/service world and what some company is willing to pay to have that power.
When I read claim #1, it seems very encompassing to me in regard to VVoIP, but I defer to Wgat's legal counsel Chris Vitale. (Please note, it is the claims which define the scope of the invention and which a judge would use to determine infringement per the USPTO guide to patents.)
link>> http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_W/threadview?m=tm&bn=19869&tid=601884&mid=601884&tof=1&frt=1
link>> http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Business_%26_Finance/Investments/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_W/threadview?bn=19869&tid=601729&mid=601729
What I know is that Wgat's IP Law firm, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius (MLB), is a well recognized LARGE IP Law firm. Chris Vitale graduated law school at the head of his class, and I believe he was a partner at MLB. This was the team which wrote the claims during the USPTO vetting process.
Finally, prior to the tough challenges Wgat faced in March '11, I believe it was stated publicly that about +20 very reputable service providers (think comcast, at&t, cox, century link, frontier, china telecom, korea telecom, as well as Pervasip, etc) were assessing the technology. That was up from a "few" about 6-8 months prior, and IMO is due to the incomparable quality of the service Pervasip is now selling.
If Wgat does a "distress sale" right now, the value will be low. (Keep in mind, Paul said the owners would self-finance before letting someone getting the tech and patent for a steal.) However, if some very nice sized companies now sign based upon fulfilling a customer's corporate requirement of patent protection (think frontier, century link, comcast, cox, etc.) then the value grows dramatically because now the market will be able to do side-by-side comparisons to Skype on a large/very large scale. At that point, it feels comfortable talking about growing to $5B-$10B or more. (As a speculative afterthought, this ties in with Paul's statement of deals that were very large and therefore risky to expect closure.)
Of course, all the above is IMHO.
IMO, it is a personality issue with Arthur. He has multiple aliases; on the Yahoo MB for Wgat he goes by Mylkvveed and Arthur_ski.
IMHO, if you are talking about fresh cherries . . . no matter what he will only talk about the pits. Others have profiled over the years and the following does a fair job encompassing his MB behavior: 'in my mind's eye and ears, I would profile xxx as someone who either is, or reminds me of a man I have smoked and drank with. Probably the furthest thing from who he really is, but I see him as intelligent, older (70's), wealthy (not filthy rich), technically versed (from a career ending 20 years ago and trying to stay current reading finance and accounting articles. Kind to his friends, bitter and antagonistic to his non-supporters and deceitful to his friends also. Yes! Deceitful to his friends also! He needs the upper hand and that is his character flaw.'
He is a bitter pill. But you all need to come to your own opinion.
He, under this and other aliases have behaved like this on the Wgat MB. IMHO there is no stopping him.
Thank you for the compliment, however I'm no guru. I just share what I find or what others share with me.
Look to the other very solid members of the MB.
And, IMHO Pervasip will take off when its sales begin to hit the income statement or when an unknown deal is made known by PR. That's the best I've got.
BY THE WAY, for those who send private messages, I don't have the appropriate account type to respond privately.
Your Biggest Competitor has NO IP . . .
Michael Arrington
Sep 18, 2009
When a group of investors pooled their resources a few weeks ago to put a bid in to buy Skype from eBay, I thought there was a good chance that Skype’s legal woes were behind them. Apparently, I was wrong, and a new lawsuit makes it clear just how bad the situation is for Skype.
Sure, Skype doesn’t own its core P2P technology, and founders J@#$% Friis and Niklas Zennstrom were trying to rip that IP out of the service. But that’s all old news from months ago. Surely those new investors wouldn’t have committed to paying $1.9 billion for 65% of a company that didn’t control its IP?
At the time of the deal, people close to the transaction told me that the new investors had a much better relationship with Niklas and J@#$% than eBay, and the situation would soon be worked out. Our best guess was the two would be given a piece of Skype, and possibly a board seat, and the litigation would be dropped.
But that isn’t the case, it seems. This new intellectual property lawsuit against former Joost CEO Mike Volpi and venture capital firm Index Ventures really has nothing to do with Joost at all. It’s all about control and ownership of Skype, and it’s a signal that the dispute is nowhere near over.
What’s most interesting about the lawsuit is a single disclosure early in the lawsuit complaint. Not only does Skype not own the core P2P technology underlying the service, but they don’t even have access to the source code (emphasis added):
A source code version of the GI Software is licensed by Joltid to Joost, allowing Joost to be the first company to successfully deliver television and other video content in real-time over a peer-to-peer network. An executable-only object code form of the GI Software was licensed by Joltid to Skype, a well-known Internet-based company that provides users throughout the world with free or low-cost telephone services over the Internet. Skype did not obtain a license to the GI Software source code, however, and the license it did obtain was terminated based on Skype’s breaches of the license agreement.
And this bit of information singlehandedly explains possibly the entire history of Skype over the last few years. Want to know why they never opened up to developers in a meaninful way? It’s because they couldn’t. They can’t even tweak their own core source code to allow it. Skype has never disclosed this, but it must be a source of monumental frustration for them.
That frustration boiled over in an interview I did with Skype last week, where they made it very clear that they want to, and plan to, open up widely to developers. But until this litigation is cleared up, and Skype has access to the actual source code that runs its service, that isn’t going to happen.
This new litigation could tank the acquisition. Or it could change it materially. Or it could result in a big compromise where Niklas and J@#$% take a big role in the new Skype. But whatever happens, it has very little to do with Mike Volpi and Index Ventures. The real story here is that Skype is restrained from innovating because they don’t own their own IP. In fact, they can’t even see the core IP.
LINK>> http://techcrunch.com/2009/09/18/new-lawsuit-brings-clarity-to-skypes-ip-problem/
The "Videosystem and Method" Allowed Patent Claims . . .
1. A videophone system including a plurality of videophones, wherein at least one videophone is connected to a videophone interface unit, the system comprising: an adapter connected to and configured for affording communication with said videophone over a PSTN network or over a broadband network; processor means for selectably linking said videophone to said PSTN network or to said broadband network, wherein the videophone can selectably receive and make calls on the PSTN network or the broadband network; and an operations center connected to said broadband network and having means for storing information related to at least one user of said videophone, said operations center being configured to communicate with said videophone over said broadband network, wherein said operations center includes means for determining information indicating whether a calling and a called party each have a videophone, and means for communicating such information to said videophone interface unit, and wherein said videophone interface unit includes means for selectably routing a call over said broadband network or PSTN network.
2. The videophone system of claim 1 wherein said videophone system includes at least one PSTN telephone which is connected to the PSTN network and to the videophone interface unit, and wherein said videophone interface unit includes means for both the PSTN telephone and said videophone to alert a user when there is an incoming call on either the PSTN network or the broadband network.
3. The video system of claim 2 wherein said videophone interface unit includes means for isolating said PSTJN telephone from the PSTN network
4. The videophone system of claim 3 further comprising means for using the same telephone number for said videophone and said PSTN telephone.
5. The videophone system of claim 1 wherein the videophone interface unit includes means for causing an incoming call on the broadband network to have a different alert on said videophone than an incoming call on the PSTN network.
6. The videophone system of claim 1 wherein said videophone interface unit includes means for selectably routing an audio video call made on said videophone over the broadband network, and an audio only call made on the said videophone over the PSTN network.
7. The videophone system of claim 1 wherein said videophone interface unit includes means for selectably routing an audio and video call made on said videophone over the broadband network, and an audio only call made on said videophone over the broadband network as a voice over internet protocol (VoIP) call.
8. A method for providing a connection using a videophone system including at least one videophone, said method comprising: configuring the videophone for communication with a PSTN network or a broadband network; determining which of the PSTN or broadband networks to use for routing a call from a calling party to a called party based upon wither the PSTN or broadband network is available to the called party or determine which of the PSTN or broadband networks to use for routing the call based upon which of the networks is used by the calling party; storing information related to at least the calling or called party in an operations center connected to the broadband network, said operations center being configured to communicate with the videophone over the broadband network, wherein the operations center includes means for determining information indicating whether a calling and a called party each have a videophone, and means for communicating such information to a videophone interface unit, and wherein said videophone interface unit includes means for selectably routing a call over the broadband or PSTN network.
PLEASE NOTE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO READ THE ABOVE ON THE USPTO WEBSITE. EDIT MARKS HAVE BEEN REMOVED FOR LEGIBILITY
On the importance of Patent Claims . . .
On page 14 of the USPTO guide on patent applications you find:
"The specification must conclude with a claim or claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter that the applicant regards as the invention. The portion of the application in which the applicant sets forth the claim or claims is an important part of the application, AS IT IS THE CLAIMS THAT DEFINE THE SCOPE OF THE PROTECTION AFFORDED BY THE PATENT AND WHICH QUESTIONS OF INFRINGEMENT ARE JUDGED BY COURTS."
IMHO . . . . . . .
While I absolutely feel for the people involved, I respect the BOD decision on downsizing the old Ojo Services . . . I prefer PERVASIP.
I like that the Pervasip has an "Award Winning Platform", and as a shareholder I own a tiny portion of it. To paraphrase Paul Riss's characterization, I like the capital efficient, highly scalable, highly flexible, and highly stable solution. As Paul said, Pervasip's Ojo videophone is best of the bunch across the entire industry.
I like the opportunity of the two companies continuing their good working relationship.
CONFIRMED: USPTO has "Allowed" Patent . . .
Since that time, it has been confirmed that the videophone system and method has been "allowed" patent approval, upon receipt of $1k of fees. I am thinking it will take time for company to assess the importance of patent, to determine next steps, and then to properly communicate news and next steps to world.
To confirm for yourself, go to the USPTO website below. Select "Public PAIR" and enter the security codes.
Then search for Application # 11/514216. Make sure to select the correct radio button.
First go to "Image Wrapper File" tab and review "Notice of Allowance" on 6/29. Second, review "Claims" on 4/20; these claims reflect the scope of the invention and is what a judge would refer to in any determination of infringement.
LINK>> http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/
It is because of the above that I feel confident in the relationship between Pervasip and Wgat . . . a great team.
Yup. I think Pervasip and Paul Riss is glad for Claim #7:
"7. The videophone system of claim 1 wherein said videophone interface unit includes means for selectably routing an audio and video call made on the videophone on the broadband network, and an audio only call made on the videophone on the broadband network as a VoIP call."
See the following post:
LINK>> http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64772772
Accessing the document and Notice of Allowance is a pain.
The publication/document number is: 20070120968
The application number is: 11/514,216
LINK>> http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair
I am guessing that it will take time for the impact of the Patent Allowance to work its way through the system.
IMO, it will take some time to work through the "system"; the impact will not be felt overnight.
But, I can affirm that I went onto the US Patent Office website and found the Notice of Allowance and how have a PDF of it on my PC.
Tentative News: Video Phone has Patent Approval. . .
It is my understanding that the video phone component of the Pervasip VVoIP solution has just received approval late today. The truth of this news will only be validated by proper notification of the new approved patent number.
It will likely take time for proper communication to the investment community of what could be a game changing patent. (Just look at claim #7.) It will take time for the impact to be felt.
It is my understanding that it is the following Patent:
LINK>> http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20070120968/fulltext.html
It is no wonder that Paul Riss spoke of Pervasip's VVoIP solution as being incomparable! ! !
Tentative News: Video Phone has Patent Approval. . .
It is my understanding that the video phone component of the Pervasip VVoIP solution has just received approval late today. The truth of this news will only be validated by proper notification of the new approved patent number.
It will likely take time for proper communication to the investment community of what could be a game changing patent. (Just look at claim #7.) It will take time for the impact to be felt.
It is my understanding that it is the following Patent:
LINK>> http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20070120968/fulltext.html
It is no wonder that Paul Riss spoke of Pervasip's VVoIP solution as being incomparable! ! !
I would trust Riss over a quote system regarding the number of shares; the updating of the quote system with new information will take some time.
Tf:
the email I was thinking about was by Talons, it is the 3rd from the top of the posted messages, it was posted on 5/26, and the link is below
LINK>> http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=63604827
I am neutral on this particular question. I am relatively new to the Pervasip board and so don't have a full picture on what has been done over the last 6 months to improve this business.
I do believe that the important question has to do with when PVSP moves to both Cash Flow and Income Statement positive. In one sense, until that benchmark is passed, the number of shares is irrelevant.
Of note, several weeks back Paul Riss (CEO) indicated that only an additional 5k of video phones need to be sold to put PVSP into the black. In light of the commitments made by some of their sales channel partners, there is a strong reason to be cautiously optimistic.
look at pg 11, paragraph 4.
As of June 21st:
The current free float is: 43.176M shares
The current total float is: 46.601M shares
LINK>> http://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingPdf?FilingID=8003666
Ben,
thank you for the response. I definitely hear you regarding "Cloud" and "Social Video Revolution".
Regarding IPv6, I guess I am estimating implementation relatively soon (said in light of the fact the standard was set in 1998); IPv6 to my understanding has been mandated for all 4G mobile platforms, and it has been established that IPv4 addresses will be running out this year. The recent successful worldwide test of IPv6 on 6/13 didn't hurt. IPv6 is exciting for what it has been designed to do. They are all important for what they portend.
I guess my follow up question is this: how is it that Pervasip's platform places it at the competitive forefront of all other platforms? What makes the Pervasip platform relevant to the intermediate vendors looking for a platform or the competitive platforms which could be dislodged? Why should the end-consumer care? In effect, what makes PVSP undervalued?
Mason
I will be curious on which of the apparent two finalists, NewsCorp picks. Assuming NewsCorp maintains a 20% equity position, they will be assessing who has a better shot a developing equity value, which is a funny proposition. They proved they did not know how to develop MySpace into a winner; what makes them think they have the judgment on choosing between the two contenders.
Needless to say, I vote for Fanning given the presumed tie to Supyo.
And then, for me the real question will be on how they capitalize on the existing changes in technology, i.e. Internet2,IPv6, and the Cloud, and the Social Video Revolution.
Given Ben Carn's area of expertise, I would like his opinion on this.
6/30 is the publicly stated target date . . . it is the end of the fiscal year and they want to close the deal by that point.
Business Week Cover Story
LINK>> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_27/b4235053917570.htm
DueLittle:
Another excellent discussion on SIP vs XMPP. If you want to connect: ~@hotmail.com
Link>> http://sip99.blogspot.com/2010/01/sip-vs-xmpp-or-sip-and-xmpp.html
Interesting article focusing upon SIP versus XMPP
LINK>> http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/xmpp-vs-simple-race-messaging-standards-295
Nice ! ! !
I like to remember that Fanning chose to invest with Pervasip
Ben,
you have brought up very interesting points about the technology. I would send a private message inviting you to email me with my private email, but my account does not allow for that.
If interested, please send a private message with your email if you are willing.
Mason
You don't mislead very well. . . .
You previously shared the Ojo Vision spec sheet. It outlines all the codecs. Now, for your own agenda, you overlook what is on the spec sheet. It specifically includes codecs applicable for both wideband and narrowband VoIP; it includes G.729 under the narrowband listing.
On the Yahoo MB, you would be called a "Troll". This message board is more polite and just calls you a "Short".
LINK>> http://www.ojoservices.com/_files/product-support/Digital-Video-Phone-Specifications-1292260921.pdf
Facebook Motivations . . . . . .
Why trust logging on when you can talk to friends face to face?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/why-trust-logging-on-when-you-can-talk-to-friends-face-to-face-2299575.html
* I'm honored with an ancient accolade going back to the 1500's AD.
Just a thought provoking perspective to put on the table about a hypothetical bidding/partnership contest: in last Monday's PR, Riss pointed out that VoX would prefer to brand the VVoIP service as VoX but did not indicate it to be a requirement.
This opens the door to the likes of those companies which want to keep their own brand and feel confident that they already have market access and therefore don't need to purchase subscribers.
What companies do you think fit this criteria? Facebook? Apple? Google? MySpace? Cox Communications? Earthlink? Cisco? Polycom?
(This point is relevant as ooVoo is growing rapidly and now has 25M subscribers. I would suggest the first three-four have very strong credibility with the end consumer and the latter two do not.)
Microsoft cleared to buy Skype . . .
Microsoft has been cleared by U.S. antitrust regulators to complete its deal to buy Skype Global.
Microsoft surprised industry observers when it announced May 10 it would pay $8.5 billion for Skype. Officials at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission granted the deal "early termination" from regulatory review, according to the government.
Microsoft is buying the Internet calling service from an investor group led by Silver Lake that included eBay Inc.
The deal has been approved by both companies' boards of directors. Microsoft will use Skype's technology to support Microsoft devices including the Xbox and Windows Phone and Microsoft will connect Skype users with Lync, Outlook and Xbox Live.
Microsoft said it will continue to invest in and support Skype clients on non-Microsoft platforms.
Industry analysts have been examining how the deal will impact other players in the Web-based video conferencing market. This includes companies such as New York-based ooVoo LLC, which is owned by Dayton, Ohio, billionaire Clay Mathile and his family.
With the video chat industry lacking in interoperability, observers say the way Microsoft handles the Skype acquisition will either provide a big boost to the entire industry or make life tougher for smaller players that compete with it, such as ooVoo.
Either way, the outcome of the Microsoft/Skype deal could fuel growth at ooVoo, which has ballooned to 25 million registered users. During the past 60 days, the company has added 3 million users and nearly doubled its count from last summer.
Launched in 2007, ooVoo has invested more than $50 million in technology and grown to 80 employees, including a service office in Atlanta and a research and development site in Israel.
As a result of new activity in cloud computing and mobile video communications, ooVoo plans to add 30 workers in Israel and recently hired three new executives including Matt de Ganon as chief marketing officer. De Ganon had been serving as a senior vice president at The Weather Channel.
Microsoft's surprise announcement of the Skype deal in May came after heated speculation that Google Inc. and Facebook Inc. were the frontrunners for a deal to buy Skype for what was estimated to be between $3 billion to $4 billion at the time.
One news service reported that one source said Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has discussed a possible acquisition internally.
Skype filed for an IPO last August but put that on hold after it hired former Cisco Systems Inc. Senior Vice President Tony Bates as CEO.
Cisco Systems was also reported to be interested in buying Skype last summer. Reuters reported that companies such as Apple Inc. and Google both have eyed rival projects similar to Skype.
LINK>> http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2011/06/microsoft-cleared-to-buy-skype-what.html
LINK>> http://www.bizjournals.com/dayton/news/2011/06/18/microsoft-cleared-for-skype-deal.html
GJONETO,
Others have wondered what the language is; it is Korean.
I've read a bit of your back 'n forth with somebody I would characterize as a "SHORT". They show their colors in a far stronger fashion on the Wg Yahoo MB.
The first link below is in response to one of their slashes at one of the foundations of the Pervasip VVoIP platform. But, it actually highlights the greatest weakness of the Pervasip's biggest competitor. IMO, the 2nd link is a strong supporting argument.
LINK>> http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=63905242
LINK>> http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64154078
You position your answer as if you worked for Skype; your words reflect their performance.
However, it does not answer the fact that VoX's VVoIP platform (Ojo Tech) does NOT suffer from that problem AND consumes less than 50% of the bandwidth Skype uses.
By the way, can you imagine how excited VoX is on this fact of 50% consumption of bandwidth. It means that paying customers can mobile VVoIP 2x as much and not as easily consume up to their monthly bandwidth constraints from their VVoIP activity.
Talking about Capital Efficient: both the network provisioners & engineers and the consumers win due to this efficiency. LOWER COSTS FOR EVERYONE.
Isn't he the Skype QC guy waiting for his VVoIP call to unfreeze?
Fair enough. Best of luck.
I think you are looking at it too narrowly and an investment time horizon which is too short.
Fanning is interested in this Company.