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.
Are you suggesting that SEVU carries a second set of books, reflecting no revenue or sales so that they won't have to pay as much if they lose or settle the case? Are you suggesting that they are looking out for their own interests, rather than filling orders for their paying customers? Please tell me you don't really believe that one.
Internal combustion engines weren't simple at first either, but once someone figured out how to make them work, it didn't take a marketing genius to sell them. Whether you choose to believe it or not, Secureview is a very simple product. Regardless of how much technology, expertise, research, patents, or whatever are behind it, if it's really a special product, they should be able sell them.
Are they selling?
If so, where can people buy them?
I know we can buy direct via the SEVU website, but SEC filings continue to remind us how ineffective that has been.
You and I have both followed this stock for the past couple of years, and I'm sure you know I'm not a basher. That being said, don't you think it's time to ask a few questions?
Come on Bigbiz, tell us you're not serious. SEVU isn't offering a cure for cancer. They make a simple consumer electronic product that was developed and tested long ago. We reluctantly accepted far too many excuses for delays in availability, but if we can believe anything current or previous management says is true, it was ready for large scale manufacturing a year ago and they had vendors in place to meet the demand. Even if we don't listen to anything the company says, I received one last September(?), so I know the product exists and works. What has happened since then? We simply don't know, but at least for me, I'm not buying the "it takes a long time to bring a new product to market" BS. I don't know what Cabos, yourself, or others know about bringing new products to market, but I have a pretty good idea, and SEVU flat out hasn't delivered. There may be a number of reasons, not limited to, but probably including some or all of the following: poor quality, insufficient demand, inadequate management, priced too high, not enough money to enable SEVU to produce (includes poor credit), competition, component shortages, Legal barriers, etc.
As for product "testing" by retailers like Wal-Mart, Target, etc., there are two issues here. The bread and butter product was supposed to be the SecureView consumer product. That product does not require extensive testing. In fact, the decision to put it on the shelves may even be made by an entry level Buyer who is making $30K/year, and may not even be tested or actually seen by whomever makes the decision. Do you think someone at Costco reads every book sold at their stores or tests every CD player they offer? Costco even tested the market by offering it in their B2B catalog (Costco Connection). We don't know how well it sold, but logic would suggest that if it sold well, the product would be available on the shelves by now (6 months later).
The other product is the Parking Lot SecureView. Once again, this isn't a complex product, and the technology was reportedly final long ago. This isn't something with a bunch of moving parts or lines of programming code. You hook it up and either it works or it doesn't. The same scenarios apply to the commercial grade product as the suggestions for the consumer SecureView listed above.
The most recent excuse was that a "major partner", whom many assume to be RCA, wanted an exclusive deal but it didn't materialize for whatever reason. I don't recall the details, but I think the company said that dissolved months ago (January?). This is mid May. If there's no exclusive agreement, where is the product available today?
For whatever reason, the company still appears to be in business, so it seems as though someone inside knows the facts and believes that they have the potential to salvage this thing. Either that, or they're just stupid. As an investor from the outside, however, in light of their history and verifiable facts (i.e. the product isn't available in stores), I'd need a pretty good explanation or verifiable news before I'll buy back in.
Agreed. FG likes to make such a point of "full disclosure" with respect to the stocks he bashes. It's good to share the reasons why most who know him don't take him seriously.
That's great Zagdad! I thought it may have been a joke at first, but I verified a couple of points just for fun, and they appear to be true! It shouldn't surprise me, as I have watched his actions as well, but to see it summarized so well is truly a worthy caution for newbies.
Thank you Frances. We are so fortunate to have you here to explain things to us. We'd all be lost without your endless wisdom.
One of the things I really like about this board is the impartiality and objectivity of the Chairman.
I'm obviously missing something here. What does this have to do with Dan or SEVU?
Welcome back Frances! I was wondering when you would emerge again. I heard a rumor about where you may have been, but it has yet to be substantiated.
Why would you ever lose a lawsuit? You always threaten to file, but you never follow through. No one would ever waste their time or money by suing you, because you have no assets and no one takes you seriously enough to have grounds. People don't file suit simply because the other party is stupid.
Be careful Dan. Now you might be accused of advertising for E-bay!
That's nice Frances. Now run along home.
GET OVER YOURSELF FRANK!
No one cares.
So many direct questions, yet this is how you respond. Do you ever wonder why you have such a major credibility problem?
I wonder if anyone would be stupid enough to participate in a PP in case the price goes up, then accuse the issuing company of illegally offering the PP if the share price goes down. Nah. No one could be that foolish.
I've heard the same, although not first hand. It's my understanding that the company can't solicit to sell, but we can go to them if we want. They are obviously under no obligation to let us participate, but if the goal is to raise money and the requesting party meets the legal criteria, there should be no problem.
I have also heard of instances where companies refused to allow selected people to participate. The reason may be as simple as the ex-CEO believes the requesting party is a jerk. The result may very well be that those excluded suddenly "change their mind" about the company. Hmmmmmm
I can't speak to the terms of the second(?) PP, although I don't believe anyone here was invited to participate anyway, so it's pretty irrelevant for this discussion. If that's true, the allegations being made must deal solely with the first PP. I'm not going to dig through the historical data, but these comments should be pretty accurate.
I believe the purchase price ranged from a low of $.50 (possibly less) to a high of $8.00/share. If the Debenture terms were consistent (except for the share price), then the participants were offered principal plus 8% or free trading shares 12 months after the Effective Date on their agreement. "Free Trading" was subject to a legal opinion letter if the shares were traded during months 13-24 following the agreement (144 regs), but they were eligible to trade. I don't know how many shares were issued at each price point, but I assume a significant percentage of them were sold at or below $2.00/share. That's about the average closing price during CQ1, 2001 which is the period in which most debenture shares became eligible for trading. The high during that period was above $4.00.
Those are rough numbers, and if someone wants to prove me wrong, I'll certainly concede, but until that happens, I'll submit the following question:
Why would the SEC, who has reportedly already performed an investigation of McBride and SEVU, award a judgment to favor shareholders who had free trading shares at a time when the market price was at or above their purchase price, yet the shareholders chose not to sell? Furthermore, if the market value exceeded the purchase price, the shareholder had the option to accept principal plus interest in lieu of shares.
I'm not defending the actions of SEVU, as the Debenture Agreement was perhaps the most poorly written "contract" I've ever seen, but virtually every hole in the agreement favored the shareholder, rather than the company.
I won't argue that it can take two years for the SEC to take action on some companies. I'm just suggesting that SEVU isn't complex or important enough to warrant a lengthy investigation.
If you're so sure the stock will continue to drop, why don't you sell now and buy back in after the fall? I know you won't answer me, as you're afraid of me, but Bizz asked you the same question.
Seems like a pretty reasonable question.
A very serious question for you Frank:
If you're so convinced the share price is still headed south, why aren't you selling your shares?
I thought the SEC had already investigated SEVU. How long can it possibly take to investigate a company of this size? Hours? Days? A few weeks perhaps? Certainly not two years! Why wouldn't they have taken action by now? I would have been a perfect candidate to have been questioned by investigators, as I have no ties to the company or relationships with anyone. I bought more shares than most outsiders, which is public record. If the SEC really was investigating, don't you think they would have checked to see if I'm accredited? The relevant question here isn't whether or not I am, but whether the company did their part to verify it. I can see why you make so many bonehead investment decisions. You need to learn to THINK!
Frank, you claim that you were "mislead" re: SEVU, yet you also claim to have had a personal relationship with McBride and others. Isn't it more likely that you were simply wrong? Gullible, perhaps? I can understand people who may have based their entire DD and research solely on Press Releases and other claims that were made public, but you claim to have been in regular contact with McBride, and met with him on several occasions. I spent an hour with him, and it was painfully obvious that he didn't have the skills necessary to deliver on his vision by himself. I have posted this observation many times during the past two+ years, and I continue to acknowledge that this isn't a criticism, but a common fact, as no one is an expert on everything (except you, perhaps).
If your message board posts are any indication of how you choose to invest, you claim to have lost about $750K on two BB stocks. Your screw ups on SEVU are known to all of us, and your claims (bragging, actually) to have lost $500K on ATEL are even more absurd. It's hard to imagine anyone "investing" $500K on a stock that trades at a nickel a share.
I don't know if any of your posts are truthful, nor do I care, but since the recent theme seems to be one of "protecting" newbies, I'll submit the following observation/opinion: Based upon what I've seen, all of which may be verified if a person wanted to dig through your posts, your advice to investors and potential investors should be considered highly suspect and risky. The questionable depth of your DD and your admitted track record of substantial losses both support this view.
Yes Biz, please respond to the great, powerful, and all-knowing FG so he may share his infinite wisdom and enlighten the world.
I'm sure none of us will rest until we learn what he has to say this time.
Fat chance.
Frances, when I saw the beginning of your post about the Boat Show ad, I was impressed (albeit surprised), as I thought you were finally posting something moderatly objective for a change. Unfortunately, the rest of your post proved me wrong. Why can't you be mature enough to recognize when someone does something well, even if you don't like or agree with them?
"Let's see, what usually makes a stock drop?..."
Ummmm..... Frank's recommendation to buy?
It's amazing how the boards have changed.
A year ago, the company would issue numerous PRs and posts, extolling countless virtues and promises, and we'd spend our time trying to validate them. Sadly, we were frequently disappointed. Today, people post links to dealer sites and customer testimonials, yet the company remains silent.
IMO, no one has dug up anything worthy of a PR, so I don't mind that the info isn't coming from the company, but one can't help wondering exactly what's going on at SEVU and what they'll finally say if/when they break the Cone of Silence.
But some of these people are so smart and may even know things before they become public.
I need a job like that! Show up and type a few lines that no one cares about, then run and hide when they are proven wrong, rather than stick around to face the questions.
Very cool Dan. Congratulations!!
I love the way Frank cries about "personal attacks", yet he's quick to slam other people. Since yesterday he has called Bigbizz an "Idiot" (post #13912), "stupid" (#13921), and I think "dolt" in a post that was justifiably deleted.
I still like this one, particularly in light of FG's claims to have lost $500K on ATEL and $200K on SEVU: "Some people are faster mentally and as a result get wealthier... Keep striving!..." (Post 13933).
Frank, everyone knows that you love to make people think you're better informed than the rest of the world. To that end, you constantly make up stories, and when proven wrong, you aren't even big enough to admit it. Instead, you claim to have "changed your mind". Do you honestly think anyone believes you when you claim to know something but refuse to disclose it? People who fabricate stories when they don't know the truth are rarely quiet if they actually know something.
You have told us in this forum on many occasions that you are more concerned for the welfare of other investors than for your own investment. Even as you criticize Bigbizz, you claim to do so in an effort to protect newbies. Concurrently, you maintain that you have no inside ties or information.
If you have no inside information, and nothing to hide, and you're really interested in protecting other people, why wouldn't you validate your claims by spilling your big secret? Do you really think you're fooling anyone?
Are you saying that after all of your begging for people to support your "suit", and the reportedly huge number of people who had signed on, you only raised $15K? No wonder you refused to disclose the charges, merits, or even details of "the case" until people signed on.
Also, I may be wrong, and I doubt I'll waste my time digging through your old posts, but I seem to recall that you claimed that the suit had already been filed, long before Rich died.
Why won't the contributors post? If they felt strongly enough to participate in a suit, but then failed to follow through because Rich passed away, why wouldn't they at least support the cause by posting? Something just doesn't add up.
You see Frances, one of the problems with your continuing these stories is that you're still around long enough to be confronted about them when they don't come to fruition. In fact, I can't recall any of your claims that have ever proven to be accurate!
You're so full of it Frank. That's like saying SEVU will issue a PR at some point in the future, and you know the content, but you won't share it. Whenever it happens, you'll claim to have known all along.
I may post under the name of "Moron", but no one here is stupid enough to believe you, particularly with your long history of false statements.
Dan/Biz, fwiw, I don't think FG was ever an employee of SEVU. It's hard to believe anything he says, but if we piece together a couple of stories, we may be able to figure out the truth. Rich told me that he (Rich) didn't closely watch the message boards, but that FG contacted him anytime there was anything of interest. Rich made it sound like it was annoying, and initiated by FG, but regardless, there was clearly communication there. Neither FG or Rich ever told me or implied that FG worked for SEVU, and I believe Rich flat out denied it when asked here on the board. It's also unlikely that FG could have added any value as an employee while living in the Caymans, except perhaps STAYING in the Caymans.
There was clearly some relationship between Rich and FG, as both admitted to communicating with each other, although it doesn't appear to be nearly as tight as FG would have us believe. FG claims to have purchased 180K shares at $2.00 during the 1999/2000 Debenture offering. He also claims to have had dinner with Rich and Jennifer the night of the first Shareholders Meeting (1/22/00). Personally, I find the dinner claim very suspect, as the evening started with an Open House (5:00p?), and ended rather late. The meeting started late, and they were clearly not as prepared as they should have been, so I find it hard to believe they took the time for dinner before the event. I suppose it's possible they went out to eat after the meeting, but while I have no contrary proof, I sincerely doubt it.
FG's claim to have purchased debenture shares for $2.00 is also suspect. If he had such a tight relationship with Rich, and he was closely enough involved to have had dinner with him the night of the SH Meeting, why did he pay $2.00/share, rather than fifty cents like the rest of those attending the SH Meeting?
Lots of things don't add up. Rich made a number of bad decisions, but he appeared to be focused on the success of his company. Rich would have no reason to tie himself to FG. Francis, on the other hand, spends countless hours posting on message boards, trying desperately to make people believe stories that invariably turn out false. If FG was as close to SEVU as he claimed, he would have known of the problems long before they were reported to the SEC.
Would someone please help me understand how Frank can accuse Dan of "advertising" his non-profit organization, while at the same time, Frank Chairs a board dedicated to "Boats and Stocks"? Frank makes many claims, but if the ones about him being a boat builder are true, wouldn't the multiple pictures and posts he has made on his Boats and Stocks board be an attempt to "advertise his business and himself"?
Here's an excerpt from one of the many examples:
Post # 94 on Frank's "BS" Board (Boats and Stocks)
"I own the design and the production molds and expect to produce a dozen per year at a base price of just under $500K... Tophat sections have to be glassed across the cabin top, instead of the temporary lumber spacers and more sections will be cantilevered fore and aft to support the overhang... Then a liner will be installed, using the Tophat sections for support...
It's a practical boat with simple lines, that just hasn't got any competition in the US Market today..."
FG
Or the following from Post # 54:
"This is Hull #2, that should hopefully make it to the Miami Boatshow in February...
Please, note the narrow entry, deep forefoot; 3' high bridgedeck clearance to avoid slamming".... blah blah blah
Interesting Gotin. I e-mailed CES yesterday as well. Same question, but no reply yet. Personally, I don't question that they're there. Too many people could prove them wrong if it weren't true, and there would be absolutely nothing for the company to gain by issuing a PR stating they're there if they aren't.
The RCA rumor is interesting. Can't help wondering if it's true, signed, or why it leaked if it's true. I don't know how many major trade shows people here have attended, but I have done Comdex, CES, ABA, and a few others. I don't know for sure, but I think Comdex, CES, and ABA may be the biggest in the US. Certainly near the top if not. Anyway, lots of meetings take place and lots of politics, hard selling, negotiating, games, etc. A meeting doesn't confirm a deal, but the decision makers are usually represented, so it can be a great opportunity to close. Let's hope for the best!
When the "more enthusiastic posters" stop touting, will it be because their turn has ended, or because they "changed their mind"?
Maybe I'm reading something in here, but since I wouldn't be the only one doing that, I'll post it anyway.
I'm as skeptical of the reports as anyone, but if there is any truth to the RCA story, I would think the comment would probably be comparing potential SecureView sales to existing RCA sales of the phone extension tool that transmits phone signals across house electrical lines. I can see a logical tie there, and the numbers would make much more sense than comparing with a $1.95 phone jack. BTW, I have a couple of the RCA phone jacks. They work well for simple applications such as hooking up DSS receivers, but in my experience, are functionally useless for heavy applications such as data or modem use. Still, they sell lots of them, and if you keep them in their intended function, they seem to work well. A deal with RCA could be very lucrative. It wouldn't likely be worthy of a PR from RCA, but there's no doubt SEVU celebrations could be seen for many miles. It would be nice if we could see a PR following CES, announcing a deal with RCA and others. LOTS of "ifs", but we should know for sure within a few days.
I don't believe for a second that CES is a last ditch effort. I just acknowledged the possibility to appease the cynics. CES spans more than just the convention centers. Unless this year is an exception, they also include property such as the cheesy old hotel property nearthe Hard Rock Cafe. In short, it's a big event. RCA news sounds very promising.
Trebor, you point is well taken. I don't know anything about the Security or Hardware trade shows, but I'm confident they can't be compared to CES. I'd like to see some big sales news just as much as anyone, but it has become pretty obvious that big sales haven't happened to date. I think we all wonder how they're keeping the lights on right now, considering their reported cash flow. Paying for booth space may be a last ditch effort before closing the doors, but it may also be exactly what the mgmt team has been waiting for to try to recreate the company with a professional image and potentially new products. I wish I was attending CES this year. I look forward to the company news and your report.
Enjoy!
Hey Excel. I just e-mailed you.
I agree with you about the money issues, although I side almost solely with the players. If I could hold out for more money and get it, I'd probably do it too. I'd like to believe otherwise, but I know I've never turned down available money in my profession either. Personally, I blame the owners for paying it. That's something I really like about Pat Gillick. He doesn't cave in. I'm sure Boone knows he had a great year, but it isn't likely to repeat, so he wants to milk it before the helium wears off. One year does not warrant a huge contract.
I know its not that easy, as some teams have the money to spend, and it makes sense that putting a winning team on the field should sell tickets (except in Oakland), but I still blame ownership in most cases. That being said, I'm guilty as well, as I continue to attend games and pay for tickets.
As a fan, baseball doesn't have to be expensive. We don't have to pay $38 for lower box seats, nor do we have to drink $6 beer. In Seattle, and many other cities, they offer "family plans" with cheaper seats, coupons for hot dogs, soft drinks, etc., and it's somewhat more affordable. Personally, I'd rather buy a six dollar bleacher seat and sit in the sun than attend a movie, but that's just me.
I sure miss baseball, though. Only a few more weeks until spring training!