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.
As a BLLN investor, I feel much like Charlie Brown, when Lucy was holding the football...
Thanks for the post, Winfixr.
It's difficult for we North Americans to separate fact from fantasy with whatever is going on with Qtrax/Au.
This company has failed product rollout after rollout throughout its existence, and it would be great to hear from you if you ever receive an "activation code" and ESPECIALLY, if you actually start downloading music. In fact, such good news may keep some in here from slitting their wrists!
Isn't Spotify continuing to lose money? Isn't pretty much the only human being on the planet who talks about Spotify having that valuation potential the founder of Spotify?
Didn't AK say we were a $5 stock?
Shudder indeed!
Expect more frustration, friend.
It's difficult if not impossible to comprehend that after 6+ years of failure they would not be trumpeting a live launch from the highest treetops.
Unless, then again, maybe, the rollout is on double secret probation!
Well, actually the problem was doing ANYTHING within the website. It used ActiveX junk if I recall correctly that obviously was completely incompatible with OSX and Mac users couldn't even get to the point where they could download anything (which, of course and as you said, wouldn't be playable on the Mac due to Windows Media DRM).
But AK has promised Mac and *nix compatability, so doubtless this will change..
It refers to port 80, the default HTTP port. Much more than that is beyond me.
That would be surprising. Qtrax/beta never worked for crap on any Mac I tried. Looks like you're using a Mac and actually saw a logon box. Almost strains credibility!
AK is out of the US.
Bank on that.
Thanks for the head's up, yep, volume is exploding. Someone lit this rocket! We conceivably could hit $40,000 to $50,000 in dollar volume today.
So in fewer words, you don't have proof, you have hearsay.
That's all Chewy and I were asking for.
I do recall discussion about MP3 players and phones being able to play music for certain periods, pending reactivation, but none of this talk materialized in a credible fashion. It more closely resembled AK's promise of iPod compatibility:
"We've had a technical breakthrough which enables us to put songs on an iPod without any interference from FairPlay," Allan Klepfisz, Qtrax's president and chief executive, told the Associated Press. Although the exec declined to give specifics on how Qtrax will make its audio files compatible with Apple devices, he noted that "Apple has nothing to do with it."
That one goes down in the hall of fame, for sure!
Q-tunes, let me just repeat Chewy's question- where is the PROOF the downloads will be portable?
According to the QTRAX website-
-free and legal downloads
-Unlimited downloads and plays
-High speed, high quality
-No subscriptions/hidden charges
-no viruses
NOTHING about portability, which by omission is certainly interesting as I agree with you that QTRX is without even a sliver of hope if content is limited to the downloading computer.
I've also read the Qtrax Wordpress blog.. Nothing there, either.
Certainly we know AK to be one to never hesitate to exaggerate or over promise (and I deserve extra credit for the kind language I'm using here), so the lack of discussion as to content portability is troubling at the least.
Well Eagle, on one point at least it seems we can agree-
A actual rollout would be great, as this theoretical discourse accomplishes nothing and certainly isn't making my wallet fatter.
Physical signed contracts? Gods, what are you talking about? That even beats "contractually awarded", no small task.
We all wait to see if this 192 megabit/sec mobile use music exists. There is no reason to believe it does, and your optimism doesn't deflect from reality. Nothing else promised has come to pass, has it?
"Most" startup tech/mining/oil companies have large run ups? Care to support that with factual and empirical data? Most? Get real.
I have a better one I can actually back up with facts, not weasellike disclaimers. Most Pinkies flame and burn.
I understand, Rackman.
I just don't agree. Whether we cheer or jeer has NO effect on QTRAX execution. The die is cast.
No law against keeping our fingers crossed, I guess...
It is beyond sad, CE.
Unless you're pumping sunshine and truthless reassurances in here, expect to read responses that cause you wonder as to the age and intellect of the respondent.
The Asian holiday reason for delay may be the best farce yet, and goodness knows there is a LOT of competition for the title in BLLN-world.
I've never had the bad luck to follow a pinkie to the bottom before. How do we know when it is finally dead? Zero volume?? What triggers removal from the OTC exchange??
"What services?" you ask?
Umm, the ones Oracle provided and the ones related to Midem, Eagle. Just a sampling of the unpaid ones that have generated lawsuits. Try to keep up, this isn't that hard.
And I've had no trouble focusing on Qtrax and BLLN- its your camp that gets personal when I point out false or misleading pumping. You know- the "bashing" part...
Staying alive on someone else's dime while retreating from promise after promise says nothing about the abilities of management other than they enjoy business class air travel and five stars hotels when someone else is paying.
And the company HAS run for cover with respect to US operations. We've seen the last of QTRAX in the US. Too many US creditors here- they need fertile foreign soil for any chance to get going.
Saying they have the confidence of serious investors means nothing. My sources say they absolutely are losing if haven't already lost that confidence, and that management will likely peel away next. There is absolutely nothing to evidence Baidu could care less about BLLN regardless of how often you pretend otherwise. Baidu would have come to Qtrax's PR rescue if they cared. They don't. The only reason any labels are involved is because the relationship is essentially risk-free for them and their own distribution models are failing, so they'd be nuts not to take a flyer on something new. I've heard ZERO public support from the labels for QTRAX in their time of need, and that is what confident partners generally do for each other.
I hope this rollout finally is for real though. Debating this in theory and abstract is tiresome- let's see if it can actually roll.
Since we're talking about the company, Eagle, let's make sure you don't play loose and cute with the facts.
You say that some of the harshest negs are starting to change their tunes. I'd say you're referencing me.
So, to utterly refute this, let me be perfectly clear- if the Songbird rollout utilizes WinDRM, then QTRAX will fail. Period. Exactly what I've been saying for months if not years. NO tune change here.
And while we're talking about the company, let's just say that most business people aren't as charitable as you are with respect to providing services and NOT GETTING PAID. Being an embryonic company doesn't give you a magic wand to not pay your bills. Startups that have good business models and the financial discipline to live up to their obligations can survive. Those which don't do either of those things FAIL. Spare us the "blame the economy" game with Qtrax. They've been bungling along for what, SIX years now? Longer, maybe??
I believe that is their only chance, PK. There is ZERO doubt in my mind a WinDRM scheme will fail completely, but a DWM solution actually sounds plausible. I've never used or even seen a DWM scheme in the wild, so I'm speculating of course, but some method of portability/transferability is essential.
Its all a question of whether the labels would go along, I suppose.
As to the "downloadable to portable devices", if Qtrax continues to use the archaic Windows DRM the answer is clearly no. If an imbedded digital watermark is used instead, than portability is possible. No one knows.
that would be my guess as well, based on past performance in terms of both non-rollouts, as well as the perpetual carrot on a string...
Chewy, at least you had the brains to get some folks out on the Baidu pump. I was caught off guard and would have been ever so happy to liquidate my remaining shares on that glorious day.
To that unfortunate result I've no one to blame but me.
And I think I've earned the right to opine about what I think is going in with this stock, especially when I read what some other folks have to say.
Believe me, I kicked myself for not having a order in, ready to trigger. I got lazy after concluding the boys were out of pumps...
Your point is BLLN is a classic P&D?
The "right time to buy in", Germy? You're kidding, right??
Anyone who believes in the future of BLLN would be INSANE not to buy in at $0.02 +/- per share. If they believe in the stock, they certainly aren't merely hoping it peaks at 3 to 5 cents. So then, what are they waiting for? $0.01?
Seriously Germy, your friends are feeding you a crock of something.
My gods! I actually agree with EagleOne.
He GETS it when he writes:
"There is no doubt that money has been the cause of the Company's woes"
which he then connects with:
"institutional investors do their due diligence"
which explains- no mo' money from the big boys as BLLN fails the DD. Excellent point, Eagle!
Unfortunately, Eaglespeak returns with this gem:
"the contractual successes having been awarded to Qtrax by World class corporations and industry giants"
Never in the history of this forum has a more inane and nonsensical sentence been written. And it's not like folks haven't tried...
you mean except when it's not childish whining, right PK?
Seriously, PK- "Waynie"??? Rather preschool I'd say.
The obvious flaw in your "reasoning", Qurious, is that Wayne hasn't said ANYTHING that is not true. It just happens to get your knickers in a twist as you've become way to emotionally invested in your losses.
PK, given your posting history and prior antics, it is more than a little hypocritical for you to comment on anyone's "tone".
...and one more thing, Qurious- another key reason I am here is to take advantage and learn from the occasional post containing unique insight and insider perspective as evidenced by Wayne's latest offerings. Granted they are few and way too far in between, but certainly worth the wait.
Just because BLLN is likely a failure doesn't mean that the next related attempt will be. And knowing more about the industry and its challenges only strengthens the investor's position.
Qurious-
I know you may not be the quickest on the uptake, but in the spirit of friendship I'll try to help you out. Once again.
I am here because this is a discussion forum on BLLN. Pretty much the only active one I know about. I'm a stockholder, and have been so for nearly 3 years.
I own my own company, and do not work directly in any investment or security trading business. That is as much personal information as you're going to get for me, and to be quite candid, it is WAY more than you deserve.
It is a sign of immaturity and intellectual weakness to accuse those who post facts you find displeasing as having an "agenda", Qurious. I have no "inside information", nor "sources"; rather anything I provide is rooted in my own DD and research. Rather than cast aspirations, you may find your time better rewarded by doing such things. The personal garbage does not distinguish you in the least.
Some of you guys have a most, ummm, interesting system of "due diligence"...
Wow.
If I didn't despise fakirs, charlatans and thieves, I would almost feel sorry for AK.
What a smackdown:
$500,000 US plus 9% interest
plus attorney fees
plus dérision if not outright sarcasm in the court's rendering.
Especially humorous was the court's commentary on AK's purported value of $0.50/share for Qtrax stock.
Laughing is better than crying, I guess...
I'd say we've seen the last of Klepfisz in the United States.
Not so sure about those lazies following this board.
There's STILL a typo in, ironically enough, Riccobono's bio in the "about" section. I pointed it out months ago but it still lurks. I won't spoil your fun by being more specific...
It is a shame the amateurism continues. If they actually found a knight in shiny armor with cash, and if Germy's rumor about DWM'd music were to work out, they'd have at least a prayer of putting something worthwhile together. Of course, we'd be so sold down the river in terms of dilution it is debatable whether we'd benefit.
Qcrap- BirdieOne is not stupid. He pumps for a reason. It is to enhance his wealth at the expense of others. This type of person is either a: under pressure as he brought a lot of sheep to the BLLN shearing and is trying to save his skin and reputation, or b: way underwater and facing calls across the board.
Birdie isn't honest, regardless of the saccharine tone of impartiality he tries to lay down. There is a reason Birdie hasn't been with us for the majority of our trip here. Birdie is pure pumper, and can't be trusted. He's not stupid (no, I'm not saying he's particularly bright either) but he has his reasons for being in here. I'd bet he's a retail broker as well, and probably not a very good one. Too darn bad those who really don't need this loss believe in his crap. I suppose it will be over soon enough.
pay the auditors?
PAY THE AUDITORS???
You slay me, eagle. There's NO freaking AUDITORS that have anything to do with this company. Why would you post such an unabashed lie? Oh yeah, I know why.
Total bought and sold pumper you are, clear as the day is long.
Auditors. Yeah FREAKING right. Liar you are, bird brain.
Don't make me laugh. Although I guess it is better than crying.
You are shameless and you deserve what you get. Too bad the rest of your flock is so gullible.
I would be interested to hear about a "pay per download" scheme not involving DRM/DWM.
THAT could be a huge game changer.
Any source or link on that, Germy?
Germy, the difference is that they are two absolutely different schemes.
Windows Media DRM won't play on unauthorized computers/devices that can't phone home.
In contrast, digital watermarks do not impede playback whatsoever. They merely provide a unique digital signature (imbedded and supposedly unremovable from the audio track) which can be used to prove the original content owner. So, in the case of pirated music, this theoretically allows authorities to identify the original illegal sharers.
Digital watermarks are much trickier to implement, since they're "within" the audio-- in other words it must be done carefully so it isn't audible yet must be able to withstand changes in compression that often occur when moving files.
Google has the muscle and financial backing to earn the labels trust in using a DWM scheme. Plus, the labels had great incentive to change the pirate friendly Chinese market. BLLN has no such trust or goodwill and it is difficult to imagine they would get the same benefit of the doubt by labels. But it isn't impossible.
In any case, these technologies are as far from the "same freaking thing" as you termed it, as can be!
Put more time in DD and research and less in personal attacks to WR and others and you'll learn more and lose less $$, no offense.
Mr Rosso-
You err in attempting to employ "rational investor"
discourse. Please cease and desist posting facts, truth, and past performance- we prefer carrots here. The efficient market hypothesis is out; vegetables are in.
Otherwise, your input is certainly welcome.
Cordially,
GTD
ummmm, Q-tunes, the reason you couldn't "put it onto a portable" was---- DRM!!!!
If one can play music wherever they want then guess what- it isn't DRM'd.
Do you understand that DRM schemes require the playing device to "phone home" to authorize playback?
As long as Qtrax uses Windows Media DRM (as it did in the past)- it's music is incontrovertibly crippled...
And if they don't use that crippling scheme- it is likely time to wave bye bye to any major labels.
again, imho...
I do not trust the Chinese nor respect their methods of piracy either. However, the centralized control nature of the Chinese internet coupled with the dominance of Baidu presented an interested potential opportunity for Qtrax if anything resembling the agreement they claimed was in effect IF China was going to put a stop to Baidu's search engine delivering links to free copywrited content. This didn't happen, so game over in China, sadly. I've read you, Qtrax, Baidu and other posters wrestle over exactly what the Baidu/Qtrax quasi-partnership is all about and conclude two things- certainly no one in here knows for sure and Baidu doesn't give a shit about the ant (relatively speaking) known as Qtrax. Else they would have fixed this immediately via PR.
Perhaps you don't know this, but it is incredibly easy to get free, virus-free music at qualities ranging from 128kbs to lossless. Trick is, depending on your jurisdiction, it may not be "legal" to do so. Corollary to the trick is that enforcement ranges from nonexistent (e.g. the Usenet, foreign commercial distribution points, etc.) to woefully ineffective (e.g. p2p, torrents, etc.). Whether it is morally wrong to acquire music in this fashion depends on the ethos of the individual user. Viruses and such from downloading music from these sources can easily be avoided if the user has any competence and common sense. Warez is a whole 'nother story.
As for DRM, of course it doesn't work. When the #1 music retailer on Planet Earth (AAPL) gives up on DRM, consider it a dead horse. The overhead, potential incompatibility, reliance on third party future support and general consumer dissatisfaction coupled with the fact that DRM FAILED in its roll to stifle piracy has all contributed to its demise.
The number one selling portable media device on the planet (ipods and iphones) won't be able to play DRM crippled music, and it is very likely that nearly all other portable players will have the same limitations. BLLN has given no guidance as to how they will effectively and EASILY allow transference of content to portable devices. We know BLLN lied about iPod compatibility and have no reason to believe the portable model is real. Downloads to a Qtrax client on a cellphone? Good luck with that concept. Getting licenses has been hard enough for BLLN-- I can't imagine them getting carriers to share their bandwidth for this purpose.
Yes, creating CD's has become an anachronism, no argument from me there, but that concept isn't really germane to this discussion.
The volume likely won't drive because users won't perceive this as "easy" and music won't be considered "owned" in this model- IMHO. Like I said, I hope we roll and I'd love to be proved wrong.
And your warning about not getting excited is spot on. After all, we're talking about an update of a website with more promises, right?