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.
NATVAN Inc. Issues Warning Concerning Unauthorized E-Mail Blast
Business Editors
LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 28, 2003--NATVAN Inc. (NATVAN) (symbol: NTVN), a Pink Sheet company, today issued a warning concerning information contained in an e-mail blast circulated by an as yet unknown individual or entity. The blast which appears to have been first sent on Jan. 17, 2003, and which came to the company's attention on Jan. 23, 2003, originated from a Jill James at search 8899@polandia.prv.pl. It contains information that was circulated confidentially to various individuals and entities with which the company is negotiating potential business relationships. The release was made without the company's knowledge or authorization and the company is attempting to find the source of the leak. In addition, the release contains many incorrect statements about the individuals involved in negotiations, their representative corporate status and, in some cases, the status of negotiations.
In order to clarify the company's position, the following comments reflect the true position of NATVAN.
-- 1) NATVAN is negotiating with Brad Mooney, the current chairman and president of Composite Holdings Inc., for a potential business association with Composite on an as yet undetermined basis. Nothing has been finalized. Merle Ferguson, former interim president and CEO of Composite, holds no officer or director's position in NATVAN, and currently holds no officer or director's position in Composite. However, he is assisting both companies in attempting to complete any joint business transactions.
-- 2) NATVAN has no agreement currently with APS Inc. NATVAN is in negotiations with Airport Protective Systems Inc. (APS) to form a joint business relationship; however those negotiations are ongoing and incomplete.
-- 3) NATVAN has no agreement with Great Lakes Petroleum. NATVAN is in negotiations with Great Lakes Petroleum Inc. to form a joint business relationship, however those negotiations are ongoing and incomplete.
-- 4) Any and all revenue projections contained in the e-mail blast are purely speculative, and all of said numbers were prepared and presented for internal discussion only amongst the various business associate candidates.
-- 5) NATVAN has no agreement currently with U.S. BioTec. NATVAN is in negotiations with AG Services Inc. to form a joint business relationship, however, those negotiations are ongoing and incomplete.
-- 6) NATVAN has acquired Auto Lending Group, however, any revenue projections are purely speculative and based upon Auto Lending Group completing a joint venture agreement with another entity.
-- 7) NATVAN has acquired Certus Data Inc., and Certus Data is currently a joint venture partner with a company that specializes in criminal evidence and forensic storage systems.
-- 8) NATVAN's ALG & CERTUS subsidiaries are expected to generate revenue in 2003 and 2004, however, the significance of the revenue is unknown and highly speculative.
-- 9) Any and all representations concerning Composite Holdings Inc. (COHIA) and its subsidiaries and its revenue are immaterial to any matter concerning NATVAN, in that NATVAN has not entered into any business relationship with Composite.
-- 10) NATVAN did not pay anyone, directly or indirectly, for release of the information contained in the e-mail blast, either in stock or in cash, and the company is aggressively pursuing the perpetrator of this dissemination and will take appropriate legal action if warranted for any damages caused to the company by this release.
Safe Harbor statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Certain forward information contained in this release contains forward-looking statements that involve risk and uncertainties, including but not limited to, those relating to development and expansion activities, domestic and global conditions, and market competition.
--30--SIG/ix*
CONTACT: Yes International
Rich Kaiser, 800/631-8127
=======================================================
YES INTERNATIONAL is YES INVESTOR on RB. NTVN pays YES 2000.00 per month for a three month contract which started Jan 25, 2003. The President, Rich Kaiser, personally as of this date owns no shares. This information remains informative and NOT intended to as a buy/sell offer. In additon, YES INTERNATIONAL has asked RB for NTVN's own thread so that intrested investors can post about NTVN on its allocated thread.
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
Digimarc Corporation:
Digimarc Corporation is a provider of patented digital watermarking technologies that allow imperceptible digital code to be embedded in the printed or digital version of visual content, to deter counterfeiting and enhance Internet access. For the 9 months ended 9/30/02, revenues totaled $65.8M, up from $11M. Net loss fell 31% to$8.5M. Results reflect the acquisition of LGP, partially offset by higher S/G/A expenses. http://www.digimarc.com
(For three months endind 09/30/02)
Quick Ratio: 6.71
Current Ratio: 7.41
Cash per share: $3.02
Gross Margin (Product & Subscription): 20.9%
Gross Margin (Service): 41%
Product & Subscription (as a % of total revenue): 30.5%
Service (as a % of total revenue): 69.5%
Sales and marketing (as a % of total expenses): 32.6%
Research, development and engineering (as a % of total expenses): 21.8%
General and administrative (as a % of total expenses): 45.6%
Operating (loss): ($1,168,000)
Net cash flow generated from operations for 9 months ending 09/30/02: $4,611,000
Customers accounting for more than 10% of revenues: 1 (19%)
"Digimarc is a leading provider of digital watermarking technologies that allow imperceptible digital code to be embedded in the printed or digital versions of media content, such as identification documents, commercial and consumer photographs, movies, music, magazine advertisements, catalogs, product packages, identification cards, financial instruments, passports, and event tickets. In addition to a code that can be embedded within various types of media content, our technologies include reader software that, as a resident application on personal computers and other devices, enables the recognition of these embedded codes. Digimarc also is a leading provider of identification card systems to government agencies, which include driver's licenses, voter identification cards and similar systems. We believe our technologies have many potential applications. We are developing products and services and licensing our intellectual property to address what we believe are our four largest near-term market opportunities: the deterrence of digital counterfeiting and piracy; the enhancement of Internet access and navigation; the enhancement and protection of audio and video digital files; and the enhancement of information capture and analysis technology for the defense and intelligence communities."
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
The community should elect a Senate empowered to vote on community issues while granting veto powers to you.
One Senate member for every, say, 2000 community members.
Individuals can campaign for a seat on the Senate which will ultimately be decided by a community voting process.
Although you retain executive powers, the Senate process ensures the policies and decisions impacting the community are reflective of the needs and will of its participants.
For instance, suspensions, and the severity of, are to be determined by a Senate vote.
The Senate can also be charged with reviewing the conduct of "Chairmans of the Board" and decide, by majority vote of the Senate, whether Chairmans are egregiously abusing power and need to be replaced. The replacement process can also be achieved through a vote of the members of the thread and approved or disapproved by the Senate and yourself.
This process allows the site, and the rules therein, to cater to the will of, and grow with, the community and not by the personal bias and heavy hand of one or two individuals.
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
I've been attempting to contact the following name associated with APS:
William Boyer
Aircraft Protective Systems
Phone: 253-224-0853
http://www.airprosys.com/
to inquire whether the company in fact has agreed to be acquired by NetVan and / or Compositie Holdings.
No luck so far. Perhaps others can try to get through to Mr. Boyer.
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
Blockbuster is a wholly owned subsidiary of Viacom.
Viacom owns Paramount, CBS, MTV, Showtime among others.
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
It appears as though Merle Ferguson and Susan Donohue have stepped down from Composite Holdings as key principals and replaced by a Mr. Bradley Mooney.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/894501/000109181803000025/cohia030123_8k.txt
Mr. Bradley Mooney appears to be the principal behind SuperMart Inc. dba MOONEY OIL CO., a company recently acquired by Composite Holdings which, apparently, is a Sunoco Gas Station with 12 fueling stations.
http://www.township.delta.mi.us/Planning/03-14-02.htm
NatVan, Inc although publicly traded on the Pink Sheets, does not file with the SEC.
http://biz.yahoo.com/t/n/ntvn.ob.html
Composite Holdings, Inc. is a Utah corporation but maintains a Arizona address and does file with the SEC.
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
richardosbourne speculated $5 to $12 per unit. I suspect the number is closer to the low end of that range.
I offered a brief analysis on this topic here.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=687525
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
I was looking for a little more detail, but yes your idea would be a good start.
Honestly I think e.Digital needs to begin aggressively slashing expenses. This is the only way I foresee the company digging itself out of the current quagmire.
Stop running a tiny engineering shop at the expense of public investors simply to provide gainful employment to a handful of friends and family and start acting in good faith to shareholders and take the necessary steps, however painful they might be, to begin the long process of turning the company around.
I think most would agree that supporters of the company have grown weary of the endless string of promises emitted from the management team of which nearly all have failed to benefit shareholders and in retrospect have only done harm to the company's financial position.
These guys have some good ideas and they are generally at the forefront, idea-wise, of movements in the consumer-electronics industry. Unfortunately the corporate culture has not changed much since the company first entered the public markets over a decade ago. They (meaning Norris' circle) still operate purely for their selfish interests, to a detriment of their unaffiliated shareholders.
They play the game extremely well, certainly one of the best that I have had the pleasure to follow.
Now I'm off to give this 22 year old the Cartier starter pack and tax that ass.
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
richardosborne,
I want to elaborate on our discussion in an effort to ensure we are both on the same page.
I propose we can delineate e.Digital's current business into three unique categories:
Services (NRE).
Licensing proprietary technical designs (Odyssey1000).
e-tailing their products (Odyssey1000, Treo, MXP).
I want steer away from additional noted opportunities such as the wireless application, the relationship with APS and the agreement with Fujitsu-10 until the company announces firm orders. I think you and I will agree that the company will expeditiously announce a firm order, should one come to fruition, and that such an announcement (firm order) is not constricted by non-disclosure agreements.
Until firm orders from said opportunities are formally disclosed, I believe it prudent to group them into the Services category where most of the revenue derived from the relationshop to date has been booked (notably the IFE application with APS, $50K of $50K deferred per the most recent 10Q, and the Eclipse application with Fujitsu-10, $15K of $55K deferred per the same).
Now, how might you suggest e.Digital stem their cash-flow problem?
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
Incorrect.
Yesterday I said I would not dwell on the subject and I am upholding my statement.
Like I implied earlier though, you can research the subject yourself.
All the information you seek is contained within those four links I provided.
But Anyway
+++
Conditions of my posting here: #msg-661266
+++
Do your own due diligence:
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?company=PATRIOT+SCIENTIFIC&CIK=&State=&SIC=&...
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000924383
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?company=E+DIGITAL&CIK=&State=&SIC=&action=ge...
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000007951
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
richardosborne,
The issues you presented were rather ambiguous.
I don't disagree that e.Digital has a number of prospective opportunities to generate sales. My point is NRE, or services revenues, have historically operate at razor thin gross margins with the exception of those generated from the Dataplay agreement. In that vein, the service side of the business and the engineers working on the projects, from my vantage point, is one that should be discontinued. Where is the benefits of accepting a project that barely covers the cost of sales and is a net-cash drain after operating costs?
Other income is what? Online sales? My projection indicates that business is still working at negative gross margins. Wedigmusic? No revenues, another liability. Where are the other revenues coming in from?
So it brings us full circle to licensing their Odyssey1000 reference design to OEMS. You think e.Digital can realistically can jump into a 12% market share position. I disagree with this and point to the fact that the O1000 reference design was available for license by OEMs in August of 2002, offering ample time for prospective licensees to enter the manufacturing phase in time for the holiday shopping season- and ride the coat tails of Apple's marketing dollars. No one stepped to the plate. Why are they going to do so now?
Your tactics are unwarranted
What tactics? I'm trying to engage in an honest discussion. You EDIG-folk are extremely paranoid and sensitive. Let's regain some perspective and rediscover the fact that this is a company we are discussing, not your first born child.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
I was attempting to tackle one avenue at a time.
That being said, I find this exercise rather futile considering nothing firm has been announced and e.Digital's history is a long road of failed promises and plans gone awry.
They consistently dangle one opportunity after another in front of shareholders but when the rubber finally meets the road, nothing substantive comes from it all.
In fact business was so dire they were forced to enter the retail market themselves and in the aftermath all that came about was a company effectively bankrupt.
I know, I know.. this time it's different.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
CDR the point is this:
It would be nearly impossible not to "improve" from the base used for comparison purposes.
The retail model burned through nearly all the company's cash, resulted in substantial dilution and encumbered the company in debt, accounts payable and accrued liabilities that may take a year or more to work through.
Yes the company converted the debt to equity, but in doing so they have effectively sold out their common stock holders. It was a pseudo-bankruptcy restructuring without the official filing as their creditors will never force bankruptcy as the assets of the company are for all intents and purposes worthless.
I'm interested in observing how e.Digital management tries to guide the company through the current storm. Essentially I am waiting to see if they eventually turn around and adopt a policy that is beneficial to shareholders opposed to their decade-long policy of exploiting their shareholders. In other words, I am waiting to be surprised- and that doesn't mean announcing some new version of their software or hooking an OEM for 10,000 units.
Until then this is nothing more than a hobby shop for Norris' friends and family- financed entirely at a cost to the individual shareholder.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
No he didn't.
He did not say the financial picture is stronger today than at any time in the past. You are completely and unequivocally wrong.
He said the situation is "improving" and failed to detail exactly what was improving.
That being said, sales for the period ending 12/31/02 are going to come in higher than the period ending 9/30/02.
Considering sales for the period ending 9/30/02 were $290,000, the lowest quarterly level since the $82,000 in 2001, one would expect an "improvement" if not only because the comparison level is rather low but also the fact that the most recently concluded period included the holiday shopping season.
I see it this way, e.Digital's financial picture was spiralling out of control (costs rising, sales flat, gross margins exceeding negative 100%, etc.). The move into the traditional retail space, while undercapitalized, inexperienced and totally outmatched on a management level, generally precipitated the direction toward the precipice of disaster. It has been averted now that e.Digital has all but abandoned the retail model and "improvements" are to be expected given the "negative" base they are working from.
EDIT:
"Additionally , I know that RP & FF have facts & knowledge ;which you don't have ."
We aren't talking about General Electric here. e.Digital's financial statements and business model is on par with what they might use as a case study for first year finance majors.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
I'm sorry but I do not believe technical analysis is as cut and dry as you theorize.
The bottom line is price is caught in a congestion zone here with the November lows acting as support and ~$0.20 acting as overhead resistance.
Based on my experience with patterns, I believe the probability favors a break down in price rather than a break up.
>
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
Excluding the 45 day holiday shopping window, in all honesty what do you think EDIG does per month in online sales? Considering their marketing budget is essentially zilch, how does one expect the company to pull in potential customers outside of traditional shopping seasons? I don't see online sales as a material source of revenues- at this juncture it may provide the bulk of sales but I doubt it covers even 0.001% of charges to cash, and in fact product sales are likely to still generate negative gross margins in the quarter ending 12/31/02.
NRE fees have traditionally generated extremely thin gross margins after expensing for cost of sales. There was a slight increase in gross margins on service revenue in fiscal year 2002 but the majority that surplus was on account of their contract with Dataplay. After they pay the salaries of the engineers, the service-side of the business is a net-drain on cash.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
Using your royalties figures of $5 to $12 per unit and only expensing for the monthly $250,000 in "overhead" mentioned in the webcast:
At a $12 royalty e.Digital needs to generate monthly unit orders of 20,800, again just to cover "overhead", if this business model is going to have a chance at success.
At a $5 royalty e.Digital needs to generate monthly unit orders of 50,000, again just to cover "overhead", if this business model is going to have a chance at success.
Annualized unit order volume of 249,600 at $12 per unit and 600,000 at $5 per unit- just to cover the $250,000 per month in "overhead", or, as I understand it, fixed-costs.
EDIG has averaged about $450,000 per month in combined R&D and SG&A costs over the past four quarters. They are going to have to get that figure under $100,000 before we can even begin to think about whether this business model makes any sense.
First and foremost should be a pay cuts among the executive rank (Falk alone was a $13,000 per month drain on the company last year- absolutely unearned, in my opinion) and then make the difficult decision of either cutting back on R&D or Sales.
Looking at some of their earlier financials when service (NRE) sales were the predominant source of revenues, they were still hemmoraging cash after operations. What's the point in any of these NRE contracts other than to give an engineer a job?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
CDR,
Agree 100%.
One of my favorite movies of all time is Glengarry Glen Ross starring Jack Lemmon, Al Pacino, Ed Harris, Kevin Spacey and Alec Baldwin (among others).
The scene with Baldwin is a true classic.
http://www.uggr.com/
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
He is good.
But only in two circumstances.
When his target listener is desperating wanting to hear something positive and entirely willing to accept everything he says, no questions asked.
When one is not provided the opportunity to object to his rather ambiguous rhetoric.
Putnam's short coming is overcoming objections, a fundamental necessity during a sales-call, which is probably one of the reasons he is delegated to babysitting shareholders and not on sits with prospective customers. Then again, depending on what one truly feels e.Digital is selling- perhaps my assessment is erroneously in reverse?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
The technical picture is mixed.
This week the stock gapped out of both the short term and intermediate term downward trends. However the volume was extremely light on a relative basis.
Today price closed lower and parked on support. Volume was heavier indicating a increase in selling interest.
While at a higher price plateau than I had projected, price is zigzagging in accordance with my time projection.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
I'm glad someone agrees.
I'm not going to dwell on the subject as at this point it is largely water under the bridge but I will state that the divesting of Jabra (largely built around the patented ear-microphone technology) by EDIG, U.S. Patent #5,594,456 by ATCO and U.S. Patent #5,990,837 by PTSC for a fraction of their future value is indicative of one of two realities:
Incompetence by management, defined as their inability to identify and retain intellectual property that ultimately would have been a benefit to the company and it's shareholders.
Not incidental.
But Anyway
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
The webcast provided plenty of grist for the mill but failed to address exactly what the company is doing now (as in today, tomorrow, next week, next month) to stop the hemmoraging.
Okay, so they are making progress in reducing "overhead". Cost cutting measures are a positive but revenues (even when assuming cost of sales of nil) still fail to cover fixed costs.
Again I strongly believe they need to aggressively slash the budget, fire unproductive employees, cut salaries and focus on the one market offering the most promising rewards. The financial situation simply cannot support multiple projects without shareholder's facing increased and accelerating dilution.
Until they make a serious effort to focus their creative capital and financial capital on one, and only one, avenue; this will continue to be Norris', along with his friends and family, engineering hobby shop, financed entirely by the shareholders.
What disturbs me greatest is Jabra Corporation. Once the value of the technology and market's served were identified, management more experienced in taking a company from innovation to market penetration were retained and NCII/EDIG had in their possession (100% owned at one time) a fast growing company. By the time it was taken out for $40 million plus additional incentive-based payments, EDIG's ownership stake was essentially nil.
There are parallel examples with ATCO and PTSC in that a "technology transfer" occurred just prior to the transferee company awarded a government contract based on the underlying technology "escaping" the grip of PTSC and ATCO shareholders.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
And when you speak of negative gross margins, you have to consider that eventually economic order quantities will impact the cost of sales and result in favorable gross margins.
Understood but we are talking about e.Digital which, by my count, has enough money to manufacture 37 units (tongue firmly planted in cheek).
We are not discussing a company with a strong capital position. e.Digital has access to capital through Davric, Polis, Barnes, Sunrise etc but typically enough only to pay the salaries and never sufficient to earnestly kick-start a business.
As to your next post regarding the focus on royalties. I'm not in the mood to tear apart the numerous failed business plans that litter this company's past. I think three of their last six failed business plans focused on royalties peppered (perhaps better said as HEDGED?) with some intent toward retailing.
As to your need to conclude your message with a dig, rather pathetic.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
"Revenue growth means more money coming in, regardless of how it happens, and that is usually always good."
Entirely false. It's never a good thing when you are selling widget X, which cost you $100, for $50. Which is what e.Digital has been doing over the past 12 months.
In fact, it's poor. Very, very poor.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
"This is not a dot com. They have, and will have more products for sale in multiple markets."
Every product and service that comprises e.Digital's business runs at either a negative gross margin or negative operating margin. And have been since the inception of the company.
Like I've said before, e.Digital tries to juggle too many balls simultaneously. Time to focus on one ball with the highest probability of generating free-cash flow from operations and stop trying to become (or pretending to be) the next overnight "Qualcomm". That is so 1999.
Regardless of it all, I belive e.Digital is headed by two of the worst executives I have ever had the pleasure of following. Two of the worst in a legitimate business. Assuming they are trying to run a ... nevermind.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
The point being- with negative gross margins, revenue growth is irrelevant.
If you are selling dollar bills for fifty-cents, selling more dollar bills isn't going to provide any relief, it is only going precipitate a greater deficit.
e.Digital MUST focus on a product or service that generates free-cash flow. If they don't, shareholders are then asked to cough and pay for the deficit (dilution).
I suppose my point is succinctly this: It's the business model, stupid!
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
Revenue growth is irrelevent when one is running at negative gross margins.
In fact that was the mentality that got so many dot.com company's and their investors in trouble.
During the "boom" many of the dot.com companies (but not exclusively dot.com companies- software and software services are also notable) were posting quarterly sequential revenue gains of 1000% but, because of negative gross margins, their losses were correlating to the top line growth.
The mentality of the managers was "we'll make in up in volume" or, in other words, hoping to reach some illusory point labelled critical mass. What they failed to consider (what no one saw- that's why they call it a bubble) was an end to the then seemingly endless flow of investment capital into their companies. Eventually outside financiers stopped funding the businesses which derailed their growth plans and ultimately prevented the companies from reaching a enterprise size necessary to generate their critical mass in revenues. The bottom fell out.
It's better off that this all happened as many of the business models at that time were pie-in-the-sky gambles, supported by overly optimistic industry think-tank projections and the notion that the economy had somehow evolved to a point where it was no longer susceptible to the natural business cycle. All notions that are not foreign to other oft studied "bubbles" throughout history.
So conjecture regarding future revenue growth for e.Digital is futile until the company makes a decided effort to focus on profitability. Looking at e.Digital's past, even when their focus was NRE engineering and design sales; this model still failed to generate a profit after operating costs. In other words, after insiders took their cut there wasn't anything left over for the shareholder other than a deficit that needed to be financed by the issuance of new shares.
If you are a shareholder of a company and your focus isn't timing imbalances in supply/demand of the stock then your focus has to be increases in shareholder equity. A measure has consistently eroded for e.Digital shareholders.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
When I was just a little young boy,
Papa said "Son, you'll never get far,
I'll tell you the reason if you want to know,
'cause child of mine, there isn't really very far to go"
Well baby, baby wants a gold diamond ring
Wants it more than most any old thing
Well when I get those jelly roll blues
Why I'd go and get anything in this world for you.
Down to the jewelry store packing a gun,
says "Wrap it up. I think I'll take this one"
"A thousand dollars please," the jewelry man said
Dupree he said, "I'll pay this one off to you in lead"
Well you know son you just can't figure,
first thing you know you're gonna pull that trigger
and it's no wonder your reason goes bad -
jelly roll will drive you stone mad
Judge said "Son, this gonna cost you some time"
Dupree said "Judge, you know that crossed my mind"
Judge said "Fact it's gonna cost you your life"
Dupree said "Judge, you know that seems to me to be about right"
Well baby, baby's gonna lose her sweet man
Dupree come out with a losing hand
Baby's gonna weep it up for awhile
then go on out and find another sweet man's
gonna treat her with style
Judge said "Son, I know your baby well
but that's a secret I can't never tell"
Dupree said "Judge, well it's well understood,
and you got to admit that that sweet, sweet jelly's so good"
Well you know son you just can't figure,
first thing you know you're gonna pull that trigger
and it's no wonder your reason goes bad,
jelly roll will drive you stone mad
Same old story and I know it's been told,
some like jelly jelly - some like gold
Many a man's done a terrible thing
just to get baby that shiny diamond ring.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
I just read the 10K and see no disclosure of unpaid legal expenses.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/886328/000089155402004055/d50935_10-k.htm#ITEM_3
EDIT:
Which begs the question, if they lumped the outstanding liabilities relating to legal expenses in with other costs, who is making the decision to pay it back in common stock now as the share price is sitting at multi-year lows? Seems like a poor managerial decision as more shares are needed to cover the liability; thus the dilutive effects are substantially greater.
Not a very forward-thinking management team when it comes to matters of shareholder value.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
Because accounting regulations require the company to account for outstanding liabilities.
How would you feel if you invested in this company four months ago and suddenly met with a series of share issuances, diluting your ownership, as a result of past expenses although the liability was not disclosed in SEC statements?
Unpaid legal expenses should be accounted for on EDIG financial statements should your contention be accurate.
Sounds like something Putnam advised you on? Am I close?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
>>The legal fees are cumulative from three years or so.....they are not just current fees.
Care to point out where that outstanding liability is accounted for on e.Digital's most recent Form 10KSB?
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/886328/000089155402004055/d50935_10-k.htm#ITEM_3
I can't find it.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
My calculations indicate Higham, McConnell & Dunning LLP, e.Digital's legal counsel, have received 1,100,000 shares of common stock over the course of the last three months.
Based on the information contained within the FORM 424B2 filed today, Higham has sold 940,000 shares throughout the three month period.
Based on the offering price of the share issuance, e.Digital has booked $276,000 in expenses for "Legal Services" over a period of three months. One expense line (legal, at that) that accounts for 95% of the revenue in the most recently reported quarter.
Somebody is making good money on e.Digital and it ain't EDIG shareholders.
http://www.hmdlaw.com/
Douglas F. Higham has almost three decades of corporate law and tax experience. He is a member of the Orange County Bar Association (Business and Corporate Law, Real Estate and Tax Sections) and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Mr. Higham was admitted to the California Bar in 1978 and to the United States Tax Court in 1980. Formerly a shareholder of and board member with Stradling, Yocca, Carlson & Rauth, he had earlier been an associate with Rutan & Tucker. A graduate of Brigham Young University, Mr. Higham earned his Bachelor of Science degree in accounting in 1975 and his Juris Doctor in 1978.
-----------------------------------------
FORM 424B2 dated 12.24.02
We also are offering 240,000 shares of our common stock to Eltech
Electronics, Inc. ("Eltech") in consideration for certain manufacturing services
previously provided to the company (the Manufacturing Services"), 200,000
shares of common stock to Digitalway, Inc. ("Digitalway") in consideration for
certain inventory (the "Inventory") received by the company, 183,498 shares to
Sunrise Capital, Inc. ("Sunrise") in consideration for certain consulting
services previously provided to the company (the "Consulting Services") and
400,000 shares to Higham, McConnell & Dunning LLP ("Higham") in consideration
for certain legal services previously provided to the company (the "Legal
Services"), respectively.
-------------------------------------------
FORM 424B2 dated 11.27.02
We are also offering 200,000 shares of our common stock to Higham,
McConnell & Dunning LLP ("Higham") in consideration for certain legal services
previously provided to the company (the "Legal Services"). For purposes of this
Prospectus Supplement, we have assumed that the Legal Services have a value of
$41,000.
--------------------------------------------
FORM 424B2 dated 11.18.02
We are also offering 200,000 shares of our common stock to Higham,
McConnell & Dunning LLP ("Higham") in consideration for certain legal services
previously provided to the company (the "Legal Services"). For purposes of this
Prospectus Supplement, we have assumed that the Legal Services have a value of
approximately $40,000.
----------------------------------------------
FORM 424B2 dated 10.02.02
We also are offering 240,000 shares of our common stock to Eltech Electronics, Inc. (“Eltech”) in consideration for certain manufacturing services previously provided to the company (the “Manufacturing Services”), 300,000 shares of common stock to Digitalway, Inc. (“Digitalway”) in consideration for certain inventory (the “Inventory”) received by the company and 300,000 shares to Higham, McConnell & Dunning LLP (“Higham”) in consideration for certain legal services previously provided to the company (the “Legal Services”), respectively.
------------------------------------------------
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
As good as I think?
I called the recent down move in EDIG. Whoopdefuggindo! I relish in it if only because it was met with scathing criticism at the time it was originally posted. While the rest of you were championing some ridiculous press release (sad that most of you still haven't come to realize the true "business model" of this, uh, company), I was calling for a move lower in the stock. It happened. Shit happens.
I'm not here to paint a golden circle around my alias and proclaim myself thread guru. No, I am here to exchange ideas, opinions, etc. Unfortunately this thread rarely tolerates opinions that run contrary to the group-thought that e.Digital is some be-all, end-all technology powerhouse that hasn't broken out because of (enter excuse for poor managerial decisions here).
You like to forecast the economic climate, both short term and long term? Fantastic! So do I. I use TA purely as a probability measure for short term direction in stock prices, my true passion is generating an opinion on the economy and the general "temperament" of business conditions.
So are you in the deflation camp or do you believe that the Fed, and soon-to-be-determined Fiscal policy initiatives, will do whatever it takes (along with the international community, specifically Euroland and Japan) to slay the swelling deflation demon. Specifically in light of Fed governor Bernanke's (or was it Liquid-G's?) statement that the Fed is prepared to buy Treasury and even Corporate paper to increase the monetary supply, in the event the rate cuts never provide traction and they can't lower any more unless they want to push the trillions of dollars in money market assets into a negative return (after the 75 basis point expense is extracted) environment?
EDIT:
Here are three pieces I had time to read this weekend that I found extremely enjoyable and enlightening:
http://www.pimco.com/leftnav_generic_frm.asp?page=/ca/bonds_commentary_fed_focus_0103.htm
http://www.federalreserve.gov./boarddocs/speeches/2002/20021108/default.htm
http://www.pimco.com/leftnav_generic_frm.asp?page=/ca/bonds_commentary_global_market_watch_1002.htm
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
I wasn't posting charts back then but I was bullish on the stock just after the post SHM gap lower.
Read about it here:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/profile.asp?User=15682
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
I follow a wide variety of stocks.
Here is a more illustrative example of that:
http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/drill_recommend_positions?Event=open&PortfolioName=recomm...
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
Okay..
Once my target of $0.115 is reached, I believe the stock price will retrace back to $0.17-$0.20.
Increase in November? I see no reason to look that far out. On a fundamental basis, even if the company begins to execute (measured by an substantive increase in revenues and a credible, measurable forecast of profitability) the fact that it is grossly overvalued today will only dampen any potential future price increases.
In other words, growth and value investors will shy away as the current price had already factored in a the most optimistic scenario and the current value of the company is less than zero.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
Good question! Read the link included for an answer.
Ability to forecast the future is the incorrect terminology on my part. Ability to assign probabilities to the future and feel confident enough to share my opinion of the outcome with the highest probability in a public forum.
Richard, I've read your mockery of technical analysis and you are entitled to your opinions of course. Just keep in mind that the top Wall Street firms maintain a fairly large budget for their technical advisory department, not to mention that stepping into a futures-trading pit, or any day-to-week trading for that matter, with no knowledge of technical analysis is just asking to be pick-pocketed.
You'd be amazed at the self-fulfilling prophecy of technical analysis in the spoos or ndx futures market seeing that most of the players trade entirely on TA.
If your time horizon for any investment is 3-5 years then technical analysis is rather irrelevant expect for superior entry and exit points.
Oh yeah, I remember your post about beenie babies. I've tracked the average price of the products and their chart correlates well to the Nasdaq bubble, 1929 bubble, Nikkei bubble, South Sea bubble etc. In short, a parabolic rise and a parabolic fall.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
Here is a history of my technical analysis..
Judge it as you will.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266
We had a lot of international vistors at our booth, something that has been missing in the last couple of years.
Interesting as a falling dollar is generally a disincentive toward international investment in USD-based assets.
Any idea (or guesses) on why the increase in internation participation? Is it company specific (in the case of your company) or something else?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=661266