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.
Perhaps he will.
Here is some additional information which describes the cloudcast storage and streaming technology Telvue brings to Roku and other on-line streaming users. Specific mention of applicability to Roku is made in this discussion.
It would seem to me that the presence of many telvue powered channels on Roku is not lost on the Roku people. As Telvue is a one-stop shop for hardware, software and cloud storage/serving, I'm sure that it is sitting in a unique position with regard to Roku growth.
I can't imagine anything MORE public than the exhibitor list for the NAB show this coming April. The list of exhibitors to this show is quite literally a "Who's Who" of the broadcast and video media industry.
If we check the floor map of the exhibit area, we find our TelVue located just about centered in the North Hall, amongst the booths of some of the best and brightest. Lets see. TelVue is booth 3618 this year. If I look right across the aisle I find that Western Digital is in booth 3722. Pretty good company. I have about 6 of their hard drives spinning in systems within 30 feet of me as I post this, much of that capacity being used for audio and video media.
And the conference floor map and exhibitors list is all public information. No NDA required, as you suggested. Just follow the link to the NAB show (by the way, you DO realize what NAB stands for? That would be National Association of Broadcasters - i.e every one in the industry will be walking past our booth).
http://www.mapyourshow.com/shows/index.cfm?show_id=nab15&alt_entry=true&curr_pri=facility&booth=N3618&exhid=1298&userid=&lang=EN&locale=EN
Along the same lines, I was looking over the exhibitor list for the NAB convention next april, and waddya know. Telvue is listed as an exhibitor, along with the rest of the broadcast world. Looks OK to me.
http://nab15.mapyourshow.com/6_0/exhibitor/exhibitor-list.cfm?export=pdf&CFID=56223646&CFTOKEN=356d47ff7d23b0ec-F5668B4F-0133-D700-C5E029C1ECA11582
I happened across an article which I think describes the unique position that Telvue is in. Being a supplier of hardware, software and cloud based storage/distribution to both the MSO tier of cable operations and to the OTT distribution community, I think this article gives a good insight into the growth potential for TelVue's business as the MSO's and OTT's come to peace and divvy up the customer base.
http://www.btreport.net/articles/2014/07/msos-and-ott-best-of-frien-emies.html
I believe you are the one who claimed TEVE would be a bad investment due to the existence of air shares. That's what the quotes I posted indicate to me.
I have just reread what you posted, and if I take the second of your two contradictory statements as the one you currently believe in, then the objections you raised in post #19052are not really a concern to you. So then it sounds like you have no concerns in the event of a tender offer.
I would be overjoyed to Kaymeyer, but I do not yet have your take on why my opinion of an arcane legal theory has any bearing on the source of your financial information for Telvue. This information is paramount.
I see. So, if I understand your tersely worded post, you maintain that there both exist and do not exist air shares in TEVE at the same time. If I have misunderstood your explanation, I would request that you elaborate such that I and any casual reader can understand the point you are making.
Perhaps you could clarify your responses. In one post, you claim the presence of air shares is a good reason to avoid a stock. Then in a subsequent post you claim there are no air shares. Which is it that you claim to be the situation?
Sounds to me that, in the event of the tender offer you postulate, any shares which were purchased in good faith through a regular brokerage would need to be made good by the brokerage or the Market Maker from whence they came.
Seems to me that if I purchased shares in a stock from a brokerage and it was later shwon that they sold me air, there ought to be a number of attornies general and government regulators interested in that one.
I'll even bet there might be some legal firms that offer their services to assist me in pursuing my damage claims.
Anyone can assume anything they wish, especially if it can justify an unsubstantiated claim of share price. Doesn't make it any less ridiculous and false.
So again, and very simply, please show the source of the financial information you allege to have on which you have based your share price predictions for TEVE.
I believe in that Press Release Telvue reported that they had achieved positive net operating cash flow in 2013. The numbers they reported were an advance from a deficit of $3.8M in 2012 to a surplus of $0.4M.
That is certainly a dismal prediction. As you mentioned revenue and earnings as bases for your calculation, perhaps you would share where you have received the requisite information. By your own claims, such information is not publicly released and requires the execution of an NDA for access. Have you executed such an NDA? If not, where does your revenue and earnings information come from?
Actually, if a company like Google even would want to get into the arena, they would simply buy a company already positioned with technology, hardware, software and customer base/market share.
From my previous observations, they wouldn't mess around with trying to buy a controlling interest on the OTC market, but would rather determine what the package was worth to them, based on their business plan, and then float a tender offer to the current shareholders based on the value they place on the entire company.
In the case of Telvue, I'm sure they would meet with the Principle shareholder and the board of directors to establish a package value, and then execute, if all are in agreement.
So, we would need to see what the acquisition value of the share base owned by the Principle Shareholder was to establish the absolute minimum offer that could be entertained, and then examine the 5-year projected earnings and P/E ratio to determine the probable offer range.
In a growing tech market, a well placed company can have a rather high P/E ratio, I have observed.
This gives us a basis to begin to project probable minimum share value, should Google actually have an interest in entering this market.
As the subject of competition for TelVue came up, I thought it might be of some value to review the information about TelVue's competitive position, as posted on their website:
Telvue serves the leased access and local origination needs of 8 of the top 10 MSO's (Multi-system operators) in the country. This brings their footprint to 50 million households in the US.
Their customer list includes:
Time-Warner Cable
Comcast
Verizon
Charter
Cox
Cablevision
Bright House Networks
So, for starters, could you remind me again who it is that Roku would be able to find as suitable replacement for the hardware, software, cloud server and field service support of Telvue?
I'm trying to piece together the underlying message to your posts.
If we take the statement "Desperate attempt to induce shareholders to buy this worthless crap" at face value, then I am assuming you believe this company is in serious trouble.
If we take at face value your concerns about "Insider trading based on non-public material information", then we must assume that the material information to which you refer is indeed dire. Sufficiently dire to induce one to make a hasty exit.
So, do I have this right? Are "insiders" trying desperately to close their positions? If so, can you point to trading or offering patterns which support such a theory?
Going further, are those who are buying this stock in the face of such a dismal scenario being foolish, or are they part of some master plot to make things look happy when they are, in fact, sad?
I find it difficult to imagine such a situation with Mr Lenfest. Why would he wish to damage the people who have stood by this company for such a long time?
Indeed. Business decisions need to be made on the basis of the presence and market penetration of the company.
One example of Telvue's presence and penetration can be seen in this obscure little news story:
The three shares you have for sale might be problematic for you. With all of the Material Non-Public information which is reputed to be floating loose on the discussion boards, you might have inadvertently become privvy to some insider information. That 3 share trade could land you in serious hot water.
I would be pleased to consider your repeated requests for my opinions of matters related to TelVue, but to give you the most accurate assessment possible, I will need to obtain your take on the issues of Champerty, Maintenance and Barratry as applied to Telvue discussions.
As you've brought it up as a key number, how many outstanding shares do you reckon should be used in your calculations of share value?
I guess I must be truly dense. I still fail to understand the connection between my expression of any opinion about anything and your discussion of what "Selling like there's no tomorrow" means.
As it was your expression, I still ask you to clarify what is meant by that idiom. It does not seem to me that any substantial selling has been occurring, so your usage is a bit puzzling.
If you could extend me just a bit more patience. Halting as I am in understanding and using English, I seem to have missed the answer to my question in your post. WOuld you be so kind as to again explain to me just what is meant by "selling like there is no tomorrow"
That would suggest that a massive selloff of TEVE is in progress. Do you consider a few hundred shares over a few weeks time to be a massive selloff?
Thank you for helping an English neophyte to understand things better.
I was wondering if you could help me out by defining a term you used in your post. "Selling like there is no tomorrow".
I thought I understood the idiom, but I guess its usage escapes me. If we look at the volume of TelVue shares that have changed hands in the past few weeks, we see what? about a few hundred shares? So this represents maybe 1/10th of 1% of the total share base of the stock.
So, what is the threshold at which one declares that shareholders are selling like there is no tomorrow? And, given that threshold, would it be fair to say that almost ALL of the stocks on the market are selling like there is no tomorrow?
Thanks in advance for your clarification.
OK. Now I'm a bit confused. Since for every stock transaction there is a buyer and a seller, was it the guy that bought the stock that was trading on whatever super-duper, top secret information you claim is out there, or was it the guy that sold it?
It would seem to me that one of them came under your warning and one didn't. Which one was which?
Well then, as lead counsel in such an action, do you have any concerns that discussions on such social media as stock discussion boards which bearing directly on the subject(s) of your case could be found to be unacceptable extra-judicial pronouncements under such governing rules as The Florida Rules of Professional Ethics, paragraphs 4-3.6 and others as applicable?
As a neophyte to matters such as these, I would hope to learn from more experienced parties such as yourself.
Your comment would indicate that you are familiar with such a suit. Perhaps you could clarify the theory under which such an action is being promulgated. If not directed at TelVue, then obviously there is no claim of wrongdoing on their part.
Your analysis would seem to hinge on the definition of the word "material". The question would seem to be what qualifies as "Material Information".
For instance, hypothetically, would the planned painting of their offices in a new and exciting color scheme, revealed under protection of an NDA qualify as "Material Information". Or pursuing further in that direction, the makes and models of new company service vehicles to be purchased? What if the colors of the vehicles was also released under protection of an NDA. Or further yet, an advance view of the new, as yet unrevealed company logo for application to service vehicles.
So, before dispensing advice that any and all stock transactions by NDA signatories may be in violation of applicable stautes, I think it would behoove any such dispenser of advice to learn what, if any information at all, may have been released by Telvue, whether it is truly applicable to the share price of the stock, or whether such information, whatever it might be, has actually outlived any possible window of applicability and may now be expired and defunct.
Can you enumerate to me just what information of a non-public nature you believe has been received by signers of the NDA?
That is indeed an interesting theory. Would you be prepared to state (or even speculate) on the nature of the "Non-public" information upon which this legalistic prose builds?
I do not feel the need to consult with an attorney with regard to Telvue. I purchased the stock of a known growing company at a time when the price was reasonable. I have watched it continue to develop new products and technologies and extend into new markets while maintaining its position in current ones.
During the time I have owned TelVue, price swings have brought me to both sides of the profit picture.
I can see nothing which even remotely resembles a reason to throw in with an opportunistic law-suit mill. They do nothing of any benefit for investors.
Looks like another contract to purchase TelVue equipment by a government agency:
Just so I understand your statement correctly, is it your opinion that a shareholder in TelVue has a cause of action against the company any time the share price drops below their entry point and they experience a paper loss of their investment value, should they be foolish enough to sell during a price dip?
While at first glance, this would seem to be unrelated, it is, nevertheless a specific TelVue related post.
In an article titled "US Rowing Announces Award Winners for 2014" one will find specific mention not only of Gerry Lenfest, our Chairman of the Board of Directors, but also TelVue, in a rather favorable light.
http://www.row2k.com/news/9-23-2014/USRowing-Announces-Award-Winners-for-2014/90100/
TelVue HyperCaster 4K Broadcaster Awarded Four Diamonds by BTR
I have not been around very much for the past month or so, and so I'm not sure if this is old news or not, but:
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/...142796.htm
Taking the contrapositive approach, I would say to you "Disprove it"
I believe that aside from the more obvious tree-shaking going on with that $3 trade, another motive was to re-set the 52 week low to the $3 point.
And, from my point of view, that L2 screen capture, all by itself is sufficient evidence to warrant serious inquiries of the Market Makers behind that particular trade.