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.
In the DNC hacking report put out by 17 intelligence agencies the word that leapt out at me was that access was gained with, you guessed it, a key-logger! I called the DNC (leaving a message), e-mailed and wrote them about the SFOR solution to their problem. No response of course. Too bad, they could use our products!
Why on earth would SFOR suddenly drop all claims after so much time and effort has been spent in defending its IP?
We're definitely building a head of steam here. I see the conductor on the platform. What's that I hear him shouting?
Yes, it's All Aboard!
Yup, volume precedes price.
I'm so glad I purchased my first class ticket early. (Up 123% last year). I feel sad for those who will be running down the platform trying to catch the train as it pulls out of the station.
I'm going to the dining car. Care to join me?
For highlighting the MACD technical indicator cross I thank you. I was just glancing at only the simple IHUB chart without TA indicators.
I agree. Best Buy could, it time, turn out to be of the same magnitude as Target for the bottom line. Sales figures in 1st Q of 2017 are going to be interesting!
A lot can happen between now and election day in NYC. He has time to "push it" now.
A billion dollar buyout offer would be very hard for Mark Kay to resist IMHO. That figures to around 47 cents a share right?
He doesn't have to! Former NYC Mayor Giuliani (Trump's cyber security advisor) and BO both own computer & other security firms. Both are movers and shakers in the RNC. Those are the type of connections that would help grow his business.
IMHO if there is an SFOR buyout offer in the wings Bo has two choices. Deal with SFOR's potential new owner or outbid them knowing that "smell of money".
Agree. With a reverse H&S pattern now tomorrow looks good IMHO!
Isn't that a nice reverse head and shoulders pattern that just formed on the 15 minute chart!
I didn't know Trump was a Singapore Telecom stock holder! Thanks for sharing that most interesting information. IMHO that gives added impetus behind a possible Sing/Tel buyout of SFOR.
I agree 1 defendant cut bait. The other two are still in the rowboat fishing for a better deal. However, they are totally unaware what is lurking just beneath their small craft. The Singapore Telecom dragon has a very watchful eye on the current legal preceding IMHO.
You think our lead attorney, Mr. Wolfe at Blank Rome would let them get away with some sort of a legal 5 card Monty or shell game?
Patience grasshopper.
Yeah, makes perfect sense. IMHO DUO realized the odds were no longer in their favor, cut the best settlement deal they could, usually granted the first defendant to do so, & cut bait.
Trustwave and Centrify are now still in the rowboat fishing. But, just under the surface, lurks the Singapore Telecom dragon! IF DUO settled there is a very interesting meeting about to happen in Singapore to determine the course of action Sing/Tel, 97% owner of Trustwave is going to take IMHO. Will they continue to fight in court risking treble damages? Or buyout SFOR then continue the suit against Centrify and other possible infringers to recoup the buyout price? Your guess is as good as mine... to be continued.
Yup and it's pennies to Singapore Telecom right now! They face a similar situation Microsoft did with a most interesting twist IMHO. First, they are 97% owner of Trustwave so they are on the hook for any settlement fee or treble damages. Second, with $92 billion in assets they could easily afford a buyout or prevail in a bidding contest for SFOR. Third, Sing/Tel is Asia's largest telecom provider. In October they rolled out their 2-FA, OOBA mobile banking service (sound familiar?). Fourth, with a US subsidiary they already have a foothold in the lucrative US market.
That holds true until Markman hearings. When Markman hearings are held in a IP case not only does the total nature and extent of infringment come out but trade secrets do as well in court records & documents. You'll recall Microsoft caved in & settled once the case was headed into Markman hearings to avoid just that IMHO. That puts a legal gun to the heads of defendants. The question is in that game of Russian roulette is do Duo, Centrify and Trustwave feel lucky? "Well, do ya?" Clit Eastwood in Dirty Harry.
It's great to see you posting again. We longs have missed your input.
Nah, let 'em flip & chase the pps North.
The day isn't over! SFOR broke through resistance. As of 12:20 it is still up 14% with increasing volume. Nothing wrong with this picture IMHO.
Trench work is monotonous! I'm starting page 17 of the 22 page listing of the Members of the House of Representatives. As far as harassing SFOR to advertise is concerned I'll let you do that. IMHO my time is better spent writing Congress. That's because there are more veterans in Congress (due to our longest war) than there have been for a long time. They know good COMSEC saves lives. If my letter gets in their hands phone calls may be made to insure the security of military issue I-Phones. Consequently, you'll have to bear with me reporting the latest representatives written until the job is done.
No, what's better is the WH contact site on which you can paste things like a copy of the hard copy letter I sent him. Which of course I did!
Nope, that wasn't me. I'm focusing on the US Congress and am 2/3rds done my list of 535 US Senators and Representatives. The reason is they are able to add their input on DOD expenditures since the Constitution grants Congress the power of the purse.
Next 2 dozen US Representatives written about the potential SFOR solution to the military issue I-Phone COMSEC problem, Mobile Trust, version 3 include the following from Ohio: Bill Johnson, Bob Gibbs, Warren Davidson, Marcy Kaptur, Michael Turner, Marcia L. Fudge, Pat Tiberi, Tim Ryan, David Joyce, Steve Stivers and Jim Renacci. From Oklahoma: Jim Bridenstine, Markwayne Mullin, Frank Lucas, Tom Cole and Steve Russell. From Oregon: Suzanne Bonamici, Greg Walden, Earl Blumenauer, Peter DeFazio and Kurt Schrader. From Pennsylvania: Robert Brady, Dwight Evans and Mike Kelly. These letters were just hand carried and deposited at my local post office to go out, first class, at 5 PM today.
Today's in-person appearance before the judge should be significant enough to generate an interesting Pacer entry. I will be eagerly looking forward to it! Like you, I'm also "gunna say a prayer". Hey, did you catch that armor exercise in Poland yesterday? Too bad EUCOM Lt/Gen Ben Hodges and his troops still don't have any defensive software, like Mobile Trust, on their (unclassified) I-Phones. Long & Strong SFOR.
There will be a delay in the writing of the National "Anti-Hacking Plan" ordered by President Trump. This is due to, an as of yet to be scheduled, Senate confirmation hearing for Senator Dan Coats. You'll recall he is the nominee to replace General James Clapper as the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). The President's 90 day clock for that report & recommendations to be on his desk starts when both plan co-chairs are confirmed and in-place. Congressman Mike Pompeo has been confirmed and sworn in as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and is waiting for his ODNI counterpart to assume office. The upshot is that although I believe the relevant agencies, such as CIA, have already begun work their suspense date has slipped a bit. For SFOR that's good because it gets more time for decision makers to be made aware of the SFOR solution to the military issue I-Phone COMSEC problem. So, I continue writing letters to them and encourage you to contact your US Representative and Senator while there is still time for SFOR inclusion in the National "Anti-Hacking Plan".
Looking forward to the Pacer entry tomorrow hopefully at the close of business!
As usual Gold49er you've unearthed a devastating counter argument based upon your rock solid DD. Thank you for your continuing staunch defense of SFOR!
So an in-person appearance in front of the judge is purely an administrative matter? SFOR, Duo, Centrify and Trustwave are going to have their top hired legal guns and a corporate officer in a courtroom for something paralegals could do? I'm not a lawyer, but that seems to me to be a waste of (expensive) lawyers time IMHO.
Yeah, makes absolutely no sense to me!
Next 2 dozen US Representatives written about the potential SFOR solution to the military issue I-Phone COMSEC problem, Mobile Trust, version 3 include from New York: Tom Reed, John Kaito, Louise Slaughter, Brian Higgins and Chris Collins. From North Carolina: G.K. Butterfield, George Holding, Walter B. Jones, David Price, Virginia Foxx, Mark Walker, David Rouzer, Richard Hudson, Robert Pittenger, Patrick T. McHenry, Mark Meadows, Alma Adams and Ted Budd. From North Dakota, Kevin Cramer. From the Northern Mariana Islands Gregorio Sablan. From Ohio: Steve Chabot, Brad Wenstrup, Joyce Beatty, Jim Jordan and Robert E. Latta. Sent via first class in the morning post.
I agree and SFOR has the right products at the right time.
Next 24 US Representatives written about the potential SFOR solution to the military issue I-Phone COMSEC problem, Mobile Trust, version 3 include from New Mexico Steve Pearce and Ben R. Lujan. From New York: Lee Zeldin, Pete King, Thomas Suozzi. Kathleen Rice, Gregory W. Meeks, Grace Meng, Nydia M. Velazquez, Hakeem Jeffries, Yvette D. Clarke, Jerrold Nadler, Daniel Donovan, Carolyn Maloney, Adriano Espaillat, Joseph Crowley, Jose E. Serrano, Eliot Engel, Nita Lowey, Patrick Sean Maloney, John Faso, Paul D. Tonko and Claudia Tenney.
Thank you for clearing the air and posting that!
This is a WAG on my part. I believe there is an NDA already in effect. So as far as whose time schedule he is on all I can say is we won't know until the 1st Q of 2017 report hits the wires.
Here's my logic. We did not have a clue about the Microsoft settlement until mysteriously $9.7 million showed up in the SFOR accounts payable. Then people with Pacer accounts researched and found a Delaware court's documents and kindly posted them for our review. There was no SFOR PR about it because of that NDA. I believe a major deal has been made and is in effect. However, we common share holders will remain in the dark until the empirical evidence on the first Q of 2017 is before us in facts & figures IMHO.
You're probably right. He'll have to state that the mysterious "TV shopping" outlet calls the shots as to scheduling/rescheduling not him. Some may sell in frustration. Some will criticize Mark even though it is circumstances beyond his control.
I'm the first to admit that 15% from ACS deals is not good. However, the way I look at it, at the time, that 15% was the best SFOR could get from a very well connected distributor. Let's pretend ACS actually snags a multi-year DOD wide contract. The magnitude of such a contract and SFOR's 15% of it would be a game changer for SFOR IMHO.