"""""""Maybe this should be sent to some of Qode's competitors? I'm guessing that this could even include the paid bashers?""""""

Even though the SEC does not acknowledge that there is such a thing as paid bashers, they do acknowledge there are paid pumpers. And based on some heres posts, I suspect they are getting something from the company to pump the stock here on this message board. So maybe this applies to the paid pumpers too huh, that even the SEC acknowledges exist.

much simpler? In either case a programmer has to go in and change data to cause the dynamic function you speak of.

Here is a link which shows you just how simple it is for corporations that usually have web masters employed by them or some one familiar with web design.........cant get no simpler then this.


http://www.macalester.edu/its/docs/howto/urlredirect/


As far as qode being a platform thats yet to be seen isnt it? There still hasnt even been an announcement that it works on BREW. Its still very much being developed to operate correctly and there has been no evidence to date that its programmed to identify specific user data and therefore direct you one way or the other. And we all know they are still working on the language aspect of it, and we know it is only in what 4 languages now. So that statement is nice and all, but its not reality at this time, when it says you can pick any language of choice etc. You have to take these statements for what they are worth, PR thats it. Remember they said PC was ready when they launched in 2003 and 2004 and we later learned that was false too right?

I think you and others here misunderstand what a code is and what qode is.

Any code, once its printed on an object is static, whether it be a QR code, Data Matrix code, BAR code, or NEOMs smart codes they are developing. You cant change the centent of something already printed, therefore all these codes are static codes.

Qode is a code reader, which you download to your phone, it is not a code. Qode requires you take a picture of a static code of any type, that picture is sent to a qode server, where it is matched to an URL. That URL is then sent to your cell phones web browser to take you to that web page. The dynamic aspect is in the server not in the code. The servor operator can take a code that used to direct you to HONDA for instance, and change the data in the server so that now that code takes you to BMW. Thats a function carried out in the servor and not in the code. If the code is on a billboard, the information on that billboard can not be changed without replacing the code on the billboard, since its printed text. You cant magically change something thats printed in ink on any item. You can only change where the server directs you by that printed text.

Now having said that anyone using QR or DATA MATRIX can do the same thing. Have you ever been to a web site and get the message that its been moved and you will be redirected to the new site automatically? Lets say HONDA has a poster out there and the QR code takes you to Hondas home page on the web. Now lets say 4 months down the road HONDA wants to sell a lot of accords, so they want that billboard QR code to take you to the accord section of their web site. All they need to do is go into their server and program it that this code no longer takes you to the homepage but instead takes you to the accord page. Then everyone that clicks that billboard goes directly to the accord section of their site.

I used the example of a business server and the business' home page because its something everyone here is familiar with. And I know some here are going to argue that that is NEOMs IP since a server is inviolved. So I will address that now. NEOMS patent covers a specific process, where the picture is taken, the picture is then sent to NEOMs servers, the server then decides what the right URL is, and then downloads the URL to your cell phone. The process I just described works the following way, you take a picture of the code with an embedded URL, that URL is launched in your browser, when you arrive at that URL on the companies server, you are redirected to another URL on the same server. A completely different process that is not covered by NEOMs patent.

But to save a lot of argueing here, I will make it even simpler. You dont even have to go to a server to change where a URL takes you. All you need to know is how to write web languages yourself, and even you or I can set up a web page, without a server to a specific URL, and at a later date decide we want the viewer to go to a different page using that same URL. We just go into the language we wrote and redirect that URL to a new URL. No servers involved, yet the same result. The old URL now serves as a link to the new URL basically speaking, though its a little more complicated then that.

So the point is qode is not a code, but the qode process is dynamic, where all codes are static. The process is what makes it dynamic, and can be accomplished using different methods as I illustrated above.

no kidding, it was my opinion, and watch and see if it dont come true in the short term. Especially with microsoft and others using the QR and cell phones coming out with the QR reader embedded. I am willing to bet in 2007 here in the US you will see far more data matrix and QR codes in use then you will see anything else. That was the case in 2006 and I dont see it changing in 2007 to NEOMs smart codes. Remember data matrix and QR can g=have the URL embedded. Will Qode be able to read them. Perhaps, but so will every cell phone with the code reader embedded. And that will eliminate the need for QODE, which at this time can not read those codes right?

No I didnt feel that way a much longer time ago at a much higher pps. I still had confidence several months ago that even with the companies short comings, with the right news TS could rally his troops and push the pps back up one more time. Thats why I have held on through the down slide, and at this point there is no sense in selling at about an 80 percent loss, especially when I believe long term they will turn the pps around.

So you see, there is reasons to hold a stock that you dont see short term results from. If you are down about 36,000.00 thats one good reason right? Especially if you do believe at some point things will change as I have stated here in the past.

And as I have previously stated I bought my shares just before the Q-3 earnings release of 2005, expecting to see some results from the 2004 launch. I expected a year was plenty of time from that launch for them to start producing revenue. Unfortunately I was wrong and yet another year has passed with not a dime of revenue from that launch in 2004. So my intitial reasons for holding I was hoping they would prove me wrong and TS and his group would push the pps back up after all the acquisition news was out of the bag.

Personalizit you dont have to explain why I hold shares to them. I think its clear to everyone who has an open mind who the ones full of hot air are here, and I will keep reminding those that dont or any new comers through my posts.

But well on that subject, I guess this is a kindergarten message board, since over and over the same posters have been told about posts that were personable and not related to the topic of NEOM, but the same posters come out day after day with their personal attacks. Some posters here need to grow up and learn how to follow the rules without having to be told 100 times.

Its funny as well that now they are even speculating on what I believe and dont believe as far as a turn around etc. I think I made it quite clear what I expect, and its nothing like those rosy scenarios many here are portraying in the short term.

Breacher......I sure hope you are hungary.

Ofd course we know they have to announce some kind of funding because they are broke. I pointed that out 6 months ago.

But lets see the break even or even close to break even on operations first quarter. Time has been my friend for the past year, and every time you all bashed me, 3 to 6 months later what I said turned out to be the fact. And I have already said we will see when first quarter numbers come out next year.

You know what Breacher, I dont sit here like some, and state as fact things that havent happened yet as this one poster does. And the dates keep shbifting from one quarter to the next. Sooner or later he will get it right even if it is a year away or more. So his statements of fact deserve to be questioned.

LES.........yes mistakes happen, but I have never seen this magnatude of mistakes in any company I have ever investigated as a potential investment. The mistakes here were collasal, from the acquisitions, to the insider selling at same time Cornell was dumping, to the guaranteed shareprice, on and on and on. This is not normal in most business. To pretend it is would not be wise.

I know you didnt ask me but I for one wouldnt of went on a MOM and POP buying spree for companies the market wasnt ready for yet. I even commented back then and was attacked, about how it looked like NEOM went of a bankruptcy list or something because they were lending two of the c0ompanies money to stay open until they could complete the acquisitions. And some here say they didnt grow in 2006 and had to be cut loose. They didnt offer much before 2006 either and thats why they were borrowing from NEOM.

Maybe every investor that has issues with NEOM should apply for a job there so they can be heard huh? Does NEOM have about 10,000 openings available?

Geesh, now to post on this forum you have to of first gone to the ASM and spoke up? When did that become a requisite? As we saw those who did go came back with rosy pictures and promises galore, and look what happened afterwards?

Do you really think a shareholder is gonna get straight answers from a management team, whose main focus is on selling you that every thing is fine and dandy?

JP please tell us what documents you found these statements from management, or are they telling you something they arent telling the shareholders......

"""""The 4-Bil. Authorized Shares were an addition to an existing poison pill initiative coupled with a share short fall make up. """"

The poison pill has been in place for many years and didnt require any new authorizations.

""""""off the launch pad and is working very nicely for News Corp. right now, which will only continue to flourish""""""

Really? I thought the pr on this issue said it was in trial with NEWS CORP, but your sources tell you its working nicely for NEWS CORP?


""""""It is there intent to announce break even or cash flow positive results for 1Q07, with increasing margins each quarter thereafter""""""

Interesting that they intend to announce break even in the first quarter. Where did you get that from cause I didnt hear it in the CC or see it in a press release.

You made all three of these statements out as facts and not your opinion so please provide us the documentation substantiating them.

YUP blame the subs. What happened to the hundreds of posts here claiming the market wasnt ready for this technology yet. Now that some of the subs showed no growth, its their fault when everyone here just about claimed we were the early birds just less then a year ago.

The fact that NEOM could not pay the price guarantees has very little to do with the subs not growing at any huge rate. Did NEOM grow over the last year? Heck no, as a matter of fact the subs did a heck of a lot better then NEOM and its technology over the past 12 months, and that includes NEOM paint business.

And NEOM knew the shape of the market last year, because I was told personally in NOvember the market wasnt ready even in Europe for this technology yet by David Kaminer. So if the company knew this and had their PR guy telling investors this, why did they go on a buying spree in this technology, with no money to buy with.

And how many companies you know of do 5 acquisitions in two months time? Not too many. Not even the big guns who have the money and the capability to see the merges go smooth. So what made NEOMs management think they could pull it off with no money and limited talent to handle the merges.

As to herding the companies together, that was as much Jensens responsibility as it was Copus'. But apparently they didnt want herding because evenb as Copus stated, they wanted companies with very little overlap to NEOM so they covered a broader spectrum of the mobile market. And the intent was that all would operate seperately basically or independent of each other, except in the areas that overlap could occur.

Maybe it wasnt sandbagging, and maybe it was the new NEOM management that was holding things back, as we see they still cant even get a PR right or an SEC filing right, and they were now in the management position of these subs. Maybe now the old owners are more adept at getting things accomplished, since they dont have to run it through NEOM for approval. Ever think of that.

Then there is the issue of those who came back from the December and July shareholder meetings praising Copus as the best thing that ever happened to NEOM.

"""""""Would you want to move forward with the same management that made serious miscalculations in the past? Of course not!! ...and we're not.
""""""

Of course they are. Its the same board of directors that got them in this mess isnt it? Changing the company officers does not address the ineptitude the board has shown over the past year in approving all these ventures to include the CORNELL situation.

Again these acquisitions and key financial arrangements had to be approved by the board, so to blame the CEO or the COO is ludicrous, its the board that needs to go.

Possibly would of had some effect. But the ones bending the company officers ear are the ones claiming or suggesting they know more then everyone else in this forum. And their pie in the sky attitude, may of just been encouraging management all along. To them this management was the best thing since sliced bread, going back at least to last years annual meeting. They met with them, and had great confidence in them after that meeting. Now 2 of them are gone and to hear some here talk its now the best thing since sliced bread.

Their opinions shift with the wind, but their message that all is well and good remains constant, just the facts get spun to support that claim.

And for some to suggest the shareholders should be out promoting the product is just plain outrageous. I paid for the stock I own, and if NEOM wants me to market their product, then they can pay me like they been paying these officers the past year that bungled everything.

its not the posters job to get qode on the market. The owners of shares paid dear;ly for those shares, and its the management and companies responsibility to get QODE accepted.

Do you think myspace or youtube is helping qodes revenue? Not a darn bit, because its not the consumer paying for qode. Do you think the brands are going to listen to a poster who owns the stock, and sign a contract with NEOM? HECK NO? And it is the brands that are supposed to produce the revenue right?

All this we stuff is a bunch of crap. No other company out there relies on the shareholders to market their product for them no matter what it is. If NEOM isnt up to the task they should of hired a good marketing firm with the millions they peed away over the past year.

Thats right. And the excuses keep changing. For the past week its been suggested that Cornell got NEOM in the mess they are in. Now that there is another officer gone, lo and behold it was he who got NEOM in the mess they are in.

First of all Cornell didnt twist anyones arm to get them to borrow the money for the acquisitions. They are out to invest capital and make money, and if they find a sucker they are going to take advantage, as they did. Then the excessive borrowing to purchase the subs, which had nothing to do with Cornell, caused NEOM to lose their 100 million funding available from Cornell. Thats what put NEOM in the hole they are now in is the lack of the 100 million SEDA.

And as for Copus, you cant blame him either. He did not go out and buy these subs on his own. As he states he presented the idea to the CEO and the board and they went along with his idea. They had the responsibility to see if his idea was doable on a cash basis, and they of all people knew the volatility of their stock, but hoped for a miracle.

The blame for NEOMs present situation lies with the BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CEO . They are the ones had to vote on and approve everything NEOM has done in the past year, not CORNELL or MARTIN COPUS.

But around here there always has to be a scapegoat for everyones missed predictions so today its Copus' turn.

And on top of the one campaign being FREE, based on what we know as fact at this time so is the NEWS CORP campaign. There has been no announcement that News Corp licensed QODE from NEOM. All the pr stated is they will run qode symbols in the sports section of the one paper for viewers to download clips of soccer games. Where in that statement does it indicate any revenue for NEOM? I think it mentioned there was a download charge per clip, but thats a standard cell phone service provider charge in my opinion, similiar to what one gets charged here in the US every time they access the web with their cell phone if they dont have a web package. And the web packages available are very limited as to band width and then when you go over each time you are charged extra. Same with text messaging, if you dont have a package you are charged for each individual text message.

And how many shares of NEOM stock will it take to get a deal worth 37 million in financing? How much further dilution does that require?

Then theres a lot of speculation on your part about the sale of telecom and 12snap right?

And you left out Gavitec in your speculative equation right? How much cash to settle that acquisition?

Then you talk about a positivfe balance sheet? Its not positive from operations is it? And reducing the head count isnt going to turn the operating results positive either. They were losing money hand over fist before they even added all the extra head count including the paint deal. They have never been cash flow positive from operations even when they were down below 10 employeews.

On another note you suggested to JONSIE that he should do a best and worst case scenario on where the pps should be, and then suggested that if he were to do such a thing he would feel a whole lot better, thus suggesting you have done such a thing and are happy with the results. Well what were your results and based on what, because I assure you that probably every investor here has already done as you suggest and if they have, the pps is right about where it belongs, based on todays circumstances. Sure if you want to project majic future numbers that dont exist you can come up with 1.00 a share pps but is it realistic based on what we know today?

And in another post you mention someone offering 9 figures in 2001 for NEOMs patents. A company that went bankrupt, and the numbers were for 10 years right, and anyone knows were ridicules. Even companies successfully sueing for infringment only get 9 figures for patents far more valuable then PC was 5 years ago, so lets be realistic on that.

yes it is verified proof. A poster here emailed ONE and asked and posted the reply on this board from one, and ONE stated in the reply it was free. I dont know who the poster was but its legitimate.

I thought you read the posts here every day. How could you miss that post and the discussion that followed it?

We do officially know its a freebie, unless ONE is outright liing.

I think you said the same thing about the last 2 quarters of 2006 didnt you? And what about things happening sooner then we think. Of course we all know know that at least 2 events will be occurring in the 1st quarter 2007, but will they produce revenue for Qode? We know one of them the ONE campaign is a freebie as was posted here, and I dont think you will see alot from the News Corp campaign either.

He was asking about your comments about NEWS CORP and asking you to explain where the revenue is coming from for those social sites, that you commented on was a great post, even though no social sites have been developed to date by News Corp as speculated in the post you congratulated.

Now where in any document will he find those revenue numbers? You are eluding to the acquisitions when you say go look at the cash paid etc, and thats not what your prior post was about that he questioned.

Drmyke..the only ones required to have disclaimers are the ones THAT ARE BEING PAID for their service..geesh.

Should he have a million disclaimers on his site for the million companies he doesnt mention. I think you have this disclaimer thing all confused.

And further more that earlier post was about 1 company now allowing their advertisers to state whether they are getting paid to advertise certain products. Even that source says that not doing so breakes no laws but if gotten out of hand could face future regulation.

Its the same with brokers etc. If they charge a fee to cover a company and do an analysis of that company they have to disclose that they were paid and how much to do the write up. If they dont do a right up on the 100s of companies out there which is typical, they dont need a disclaimer stating they dont cover each of those companies.

And you all wonder why sites like TS and PP dont want to give NEOM any attention. Maybe its because of the bashing they recieve from posters from this site.

AURA had been developed by May of 2003, so obviously they didnt need NEOM to bring mobile navigation to their attention at a luncheon in 2004? They themselves had already developed a mobile navigation program over a year earlier right? And I expect if it was developed by May of 2003, then they started on it much earlier then you suggest, unless it was done in 5 months or less.

I thought the post here said they began in 2000 but could be wrong on that, but in either case it was well before the lunch with NEOM, and it was a different individual who worked on AURA so yes maybe the person you refer to was suprised, but perhaps the one who designed AURA would not of been as supprised by Chas' demo.

http://interactive.usc.edu/archives/000377.html

Is that why there was a post here a couple days ago that stated in a pr or some type of article, that microsoft had been working on AURA since 2000. But then needed NEOM to introduce them to mobile navagation in 2004?

I dont recall who put that post up here but its worth reposting to clear up the facts.

Also you make statements that you supposedly researched out and then tell the others here if they want to verify your statements they can google the topic. Why not just post the links that verify the information you are claiming?

How so? What patents does NEOM hold for collecting user data based on the users actions, whether they are scanning a barcode or surfing the web. The answer is NONE.

Once again NEOMs patents are limited to a certain procedure, which when you scan something with your phone sends that info to a server, which in turn sends your phone back a URL to a website.

How so many keep confusing that I dont understand, and obviously what was in your post is out of the scope of NEOMs patents, and you say it screams sue me?

Because the stock is fairly priced where its at right now, absent any big promoter pushing it like TS was.

Some here have said its undervalued especially with the subs. That too is not true. NEOM still owes those subs 20 million dollars to complete the acquisitions, and then if you look at the goodwill for each of them its obvious NEOM paid way more then they are worth at the present time.

So technically speaking, and considering all the financial data, and excluding the hype or speculation part, its where it should be at this time.

No LES......the shares are not issued. Thats why they are not in the outstanding shares. A piece of paper is issued guaranteeing that person the right to buy x number of shares at a set price. If that person decides to buy the shares at a later date, and the right to buy is vested, he then exercises his right and pays the company the per share exercise price and in return the company issues him the stock certificates.

Then if he exercised his options at say .01 a share and the stock price on the market is .20 a share the company has to right off the difference on their financial statement as a charge.

So its you the shareholder that eats the difference in price when and if the options are exercised. Until they are exercised, no money is paid by anyone, because its only a piece of paper. The same is the case with warrants like cornell has. When cornell decides to exercise those warrants, they have to pay NEOM they exercise price per share, and in return they get the stock certificates, and then they can sell the stock or hold it.

So it is definately a gain for the compaqny any time warrants or options are exercised.

then maybe you should of CORRECTED HIM instead of thinking you had cause to attack me. I wasnt concerned with with whether he used the right currency, and only addressed the revenue issue.

But your GEESH and your correction was directed at me instead of the poster. A little to quick to jump huh?

maybe you need to open your eyes. That was a quote from Banks post not my words zand thats why it was inside QUOTATION MARKS. Notice I used the words China in my commentary.

""""""""Now if we only can get some yen from them we will be all set. It sure would be nice if we knew the financial details were of these contracts"""""""

LOL Banks..........they have to get the software developed to work in China first before any revenue can be realized. As the PR states they are still working on it to work with smart codes, and on top of that I havent seen an announcement yet that it even works in the chinese language, as we saw announced on the languauges it does now work on. So I dont think we should be worrying about revenue from these 5 just yet.

"""""NeoMedia said it is working to adapt qode to use smart codes to enable millions of policy holders in China to use their cell phones to link directly to their insurance company's Mobile Internet site.

""""""

Yes Bob they do, if they dont have options to exercise. But typically they will exercise their options first, and if they have no more options and want to buy, then they have to do so over the regular market, through a broker like we regular traders do.

For instance if an officer has options for a million shares at .01 a share that are vested, and the stock is trading at say .20 in open market, he wont go buy a million shares for .20 a share when he can buy the same million at .01 a share.

No it isnt comparing apples to oranges. First of all the statement was made that CEOs do not invest in the companies they run, because they get so many free options. Thats the point being discussed and Caplan was an example proving that statement to be false.

Now lets address your apples to oranges statement which was not the issue being discussed. Caplan has been the CEO less then 4 years. The bulk of his pay package is options and bonus based on PERFORMANCE. He took the company in less then 4 years from a 5.00 stock to as high as 25.00 a stock this year, so he earned all those options and bonus' that are the majority of his pay package. And no he didnt get 4 million the first year either. And contrary to what another poster posted here he bought nearly 4 million in Etrade stock in 2006 through 3 purchases and sold less then 1/2 million. The GAAP EPS for 2005 was .93 a share.

But back to the issue. Jensen has invested nothing in NEOM the entire time he was CEO. Even with all those cheap .01 optiuons he had and he had millions of them, he never invested and bought stock and helg onto it, as most CEOs of companies do. Thats was the discussion.

options have to be bought dont they?

The fact is he owns about 1.5 million shares of the company or over 20 million dollars worth, and the last purchase was for nearly 1/2 million.

That was just one example. You can find the same thing with every company.

And since you refer to his converting options and therefore thats inmaterial, if thats the case how come Jensen never converted any of his, if its no big deal?

And Les did you notice on that one I just gave you the link to he bought 25000 more shares at 21.00 a share or nearly 1/2 million dollars worth? And Jensen owned 1500 shares he got at .01 a share or 15.00 worth.......thats a real joke.

LOL..good one personalizit........the same is true here in the US if you go check the filings for each company. It might not be true for penny stocks, because those CEOs dont want the risk.

But how do you go out and try to get the investment community to invest in the company you run, when you hold a measely 150.00 worth of your own stock?

here is the first one I pulled up. The CEO of etrade. Owns over 1 million shares of the company and he didnt get his shares at .01 each either. At Jensens price of .01 he should own above 10 million shares.

http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=4485226&Type=HTML

by the way les.....your research is flawed. The officers dont buy stock on the open market. They first exercise any options they have and convert those options into common stock.

Which brings up the 3rd reason why an officer would buy stock, which I forgot to mention in the earlier post. When they convert options they have to pay neom the conversion price per share, which infuses capital into the company. And we all know NEOM needs all the capital it can get its hands on.

And as I said in the past post, those options are worthless, unless Jensen decides to pay NEOM the conversion price to convert them to stock, then he can sell them for a profit.

because about every CEO in the country in a reputable company buys stock in the company they run. It serves 2 purposes, first he cant make money off those options unless he buys the stock, and second it lets investors know they insiders are confident enough to invest their own money.

He cant sell those options for a profit can he? He has to convert them to common stock first.

those are all options. He only actually owns 1500 shares of stock. But I am glad you pointed that out because I didnt think to look there to see what his remaining options were.

But the fact is at this time and the whole time he has only held 1500 shares of stock. That is what the top half of the form is is actual stock. The bottom half is derivatives like options or warrants.

Whats pathetic is that he only held 1500 shares of NEOM all this time, as the CEO. I dont think the 4 million options he forfeited was all of his options, but dont remember now. I think he had some that were in the money or vested that he still holds onto. But I dont agree with them giving him another 750,000 shares at .01 as part of his termination.

But the good news is thats 4 million shares taken out of the diluted share count.

obviously every one of my posts almost daily are responses to what someone else posted, so if your hearing the same thing day after day, it certainly isnt me starting the topic, since my post is a response and not a new topic post.