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.
From the IRS
"Section 382 imposes a limitation on a corporation’s use of net operating loss carryovers following a change in ownership. The legislative history explains that a limitation is necessary following a change in ownership because new shareholders otherwise would have an opportunity to contribute income-producing assets (or divert income opportunities) to the corporation, thus inappropriately accelerating the use of net operating loss carryovers. The section 382 limitation is intended to prevent a corporation from obtaining greater loss utilization than it could have achieved absent a change in ownership. S. Rep. No. 99-313 at 232 (1986)."
Ants bought Inventa. There was no change(yet) in Ants ownership. This doesn't apply, well unless Inventa brought some losses to the table which I doubt.
And some saga it is. All the way from the Vancouver fiasco, and the subsequent wiring(for recording purposes) of Don by the FBI to this. If we finally achieve success, and it sure looks like we are close, this would make a Hollywood movie no one would believe could be real
Yes, I remember the name. And I tended to believe it because you said the financing/legal mess broke the deal. Is that correct?
Mike, you can, but be very careful how you do it. Stay on point. I sure don't have any problem with negative information. I need that. But the use of negative information for propagandistic purposes starts to grate, and then slipping in little lies completely crosses the line.
This is not correct. Joe mentioned that our lead was about 3 years, but we may have the best solution locked up. Hewlett was just a rumor by one poster and if I remember the other interested party was a Chinese company. Neither of these are in any filings of which I'm aware.
T, as I pointed out in the last several posts, Ants was already in the cloud business. And yes, I'm aware of that new and VERY important attribute of the AAA. I posted about it several times before. This is one reason Ants got in so much trouble. To get a new version up and running took a lot of time and money. With Franks version if IBM doesn't want to bite, well fine we'll deal with SAP, or Oracle, or...even 4js and our old database product the ADS with no big delay. You pretty much get it, but the old timers and the tech guys are the ones who really see the potential here. The risks are that one of the big boys is working on their own ACS type product, but it's doubtful all of them would come up with one in the same time frame even if they could, and then there's the question of patents. Just how much of the more elegant solutions do we have locked up? And even if one of the big boys came up with a like product, that would be all the more reason for their competitors to deal with us
Here is a 1/26/2010 blog entry about cloud computing and Ants. They've been considering this for quite some time, and who knows what Frank brings to the table that is new. Boy, looking over the blog again reminds me how there is never a sure thing. Awards, great partnership with IBM, big customers with critical applications, and then BOOM. I'm still not exactly sure what happened. I mean, how do you get that far along and then find a software issue that stops everything???Arrgghhhhhhh. Venting.
"Last week I shared news of the Microsoft-HP cloud computing development pact. This week I would like to take a few minutes to explain what this development and the larger cloud computing movement means to ANTs and where our services fit into the mix.
It is important to understand the challenges associated with enterprise usage of cloud computing offerings. Last week Bernard Golden shared his thoughts in a thoughtful piece, The Case Against Cloud Computing, Part One. Golden says that cloud computing is not ready for prime time and enterprise use quite yet. He sites various conversations with business leaders and IT leaders that are disillusioned about the prospect of a migration to the cloud.
Why? Migration of enterprise applications and databases.
As is the case with the traditional RDBMS capability and portability are in seriously short supply in cloud computing solutions. While the concept of cloud computing seems intriguing and presents organizational advantages on paper, many enterprise customers soon become dissuaded from any cloud solutions when the realities of application and data migration are brought into full view.
I agree with Golden on this point. Cloud computing solutions like Amazon Web Service, Salesforce.com and Google App Engine are, indeed, in their infancy as commercially viable products.
However, I believe that migration is not as high of a hurdle as some have suggested. Our ACS product makes possible and affordable migrations that were also thought to be far too complex and far too costly only a few years ago. Data’s value today is often only as great as its portability and compatibility. Understanding this reality of today’s networked world, ANTs is committed to developing solutions for the pressing enterprise IT needs of today’s organization, cloud computing included.
In summary, cloud computing is an important trend that we will keep monitoring and implement the right strategy to help customers move their enterprise applications and databases to the cloud."
Joe Kozak.
I don't think any bodies missing the diversity aspect, but IMHO the ACS is going to be the thing that can potentially send this to the moon. And one aspect to remember about the ACS, at least in it's earlier version and I would guess now, is if a database was not ready for the cloud and you used the ACS to switch to a new database, the database was now ready for "the cloud". Joe related this in a conference call several years ago. I need to check with Frank about this aspect in the new version. I would guess it's still there. And remember, we do not have to be dependent on anybody. This software will take customers from Oracle and give them to Microsoft just as it will take from Sybase/SAP and give to IBM. Like I said before, it might be a delicate balancing act when it comes to customers.
How many companies/agencies have multiple databases? How many would like...no, need to save money in this economic environment as well as simplify? If the completed AAA works as expected are we in a sweet spot or what? I'll repeat what Don Haderle said in an Ants conference call(2010 I believe) when asked by Joe about the earlier products potential. "Exciting beyond belief".
Yes, those are repriced, but in 2008, long before the problems. Show me where he repriced options...well in your words, "as the share price plummeted". Is this another example of your deception? Show me and I'll acknowledge you are right on this one.
And I'll leave it to the reader to determine if your lie is an opinion of mine or not.
That is not my opinion. You lied for selfish ends. And when did Joe reprice options? Show me.
OK, this time without the personal attack aka the truth.
I believe that post was deleted, and the point is you lied about Joe to try and cast a him in a bad light and by extension, the company. In the post in question you said that Joe told investors the stock was a good buy in his blog(which he did), and that he was selling shares at the same time(which he was not, and as an insider that is easily documented). Saying things like that make Ants under Joe appear like a scam thereby diminishing it's current prospects.
What does that have to do with my question???
Doesn't pass the smell test. This is supposed to explain why you obsessively post negative information about Ants? Not only that, but you deliberately tell lies. See post 14288. And this is a pattern repeated from Yahoo. I'm curious. Exactly how did this software "fail" during the demonstration? Be specific. And why did you think he would lose everything at $3. That was about the time of the IBM product announcement at their world conference in Rome. I figured a pullback might have been in order at that point, but things looked really good for the future. There was no indication of the events to follow. After all the software was inside IBM hardware. Surely this had been thoroughly tested.
When those events you desire happen, do you think the stock price will be anywhere close to here? Oh, possibly.... if we only get 2 contracts and the margins are 3%. Really man, "significant events" can mean a lot more than confirmed revenues. Looking at Frank's work history is there anything that would lead you to believe he's lying? Those are pretty big names being thrown around. And we've got plenty of history with one. Do you think Frank is not being straight about the inquiries from the Fortune 500 companies? I don't know about you, but Frank strikes me as a pretty straight shooter.
T, Tiger was publicly criticizing Joe when he was CEO just like he's criticizing Frank now. It doesn't matter the CEO or the state of the company. It's something else. In other words it's extremely doubtful that Tiger is Joe. And we should be careful in our criticism of Joe. He was really dealt a terrible blow when the software issues surfaced and SAP bought Sybase. I don't publicly hear anything about the latter, but logic tells me it had an impact. I'm not saying he's without flaws, but when people call him a scam artist or criminal it turns Ants into your stereotypical penny stock. It was never a scam. They had/have a real product with very big names endorsing the product as well as the independent press. And interested users of the stature of Citibank. When people call Joe a criminal or scam artist it diminishes the truth.
IMO the advanced architecture ACS completion is the most significant piece of news we are waiting on. What you must remember is this software is good for ANY two databases. IBM does not have to be involved. That said, they definitely should be. Remember, the first product for IBM was the Sybase to IBM version, but about the time that was put out in the marketplace SAP bought Sybase, and SAP might have used their resources to entice some of the Sybase customers to stay. SAP and IBM are also partners in some dealings so that may impact things. It just may not be as easy as previously thought to sign those Sybase customers. Several years back Joe wisely decided to focus on Sybase(with prompting from users), as many of their customers were not happy, but things may have changed. I don't know. Now according to Frank we are talking to both IBM and SAP regarding the ACS, and I know big corporations both compete and cooperate, but if IBM uses the product they can just as easily take business from Oracle, Microsoft, or any number of smaller databases as well as SAP. A fair amount of diplomacy will probably be needed by Frank in these dealings. Years ago Joe mentioned that having IBM as a big brother was good, but Ants needed to broaden their offerings so as to not be so dependent on IBM. Agreed, but we never got the chance. The bottom line is that we should be where the customer wants to go. And I can't shake the feeling that Rik's hiring may have something to do with Ants former database product, the Ants Data Server. That's what he was a top salesman for, but Ants doesn't own it anymore. Now the good news. The bottom line for the bottom line is potentially explosive.
In my previous post's section about "today" I forgot to mention...well I forgot many things, but I forgot to mention Rik Sanchez. I'll basically repeat what I said several weeks ago. Why would a very successful database salesman, who could get a position just about anywhere he chose, choose to work for a penny stock that is delinquent in it's filings to boot?
"But nothing has been proven yet"
"Proven" must contain varying degrees of certainty in the context of which you speak. Using the word "nothing" is simply wrong. Let's take a look at Ants.
Historically speaking, here are several excerpts from an article in InformationWeek
http://www.informationweek.com/software/information-management/ibm-to-migrate-sybase-customers-to-db2/225200014
"Don Haderle, who retired as an IBM Fellow in 2005, is a founding member of the ANTs technical advisory board and helped ANTs build its relationship with IBM. He is regarded as "the father of DB2," as the leader of the technical team that developed it in the 1980s."
"Kovak said Citigroup has 3,000 Sybase applications and Credit Suisse has 10,000. Both are candidates to convert some of them to DB2, he claimed."
Citi is referenced earlier in the article. The article goes on to mention Pep Boys and BJC HealthCare as users as well as:
"The Italian fashion e-retailer, Faith Industry, is another user, along with ABSA Bank in South Africa, IBM spokesmen said."
There are other users not mentioned in the article. For example the electric utility company in California. Frank said they are still using the product but Ants is receiving no revenue.
It's beyond dispute that the product, had it worked properly, was desired.
Jumping to today, we have a revamped product, done by an individual that clearly had the background for the task. Don Haderle has looked at the results and concluded that this was "the technically correct approach". And yes, we are talking to SAP and IBM. Putting that in the context of the companies background, you simply cannot dismiss it as "the tail wagging the dog". Comparing this to a typical penny stock is not only disingenuous, it's utterly absurd. And I haven't even mentioned the Doctors other ventures that he is folding into Ants.
By the way, at the bottom of the article cited above it talks about the irony involved with the South African Bank choosing the ACS because of IBM's close relationship with SAP. We all know what happened next with SAP and Sybase. Interesting.
Do I need to repeat the question?
Every one of them huh? I repeat. Please tell me the penny stocks out there that have the potential of Ants. The history, the relationships, the management, the products, the low market cap. Did/do they have a working relationship with a global powerhouse? Do they have management on the level of ours? Do they have a product that has the potential to change the IT landscape? Do they have inquiries about their product from Fortune 500 companies? Are they valued at a paltry 6 million. There might be a few more cheap companies out there and I'd really love to know who they are. And I need more than management bluster about how great their product is. There are different levels of potential. Ours may not be realized yet, but it is without question there. Just look at Ants history to verify that.
Now, now. Let's keep our facts straight. The run started Tuesday if I'm remembering correctly, because the day before I bought a large chunk of shares at .0065 cents (whew, that was close). Now have my gains disappeared as fast as they appeared? And so it will continue, as progress is achieved and reported.
You say that opportunities like this happen "every single day in the pennies"? Well I'm all ears. Please tell me the penny stocks out there that have the potential of Ants. The history, the relationships, the management, the products, the low market cap. Yeah!!! Tell me the names of those babies.
The recent gains did not disappear as fast as they appeared. And any news that could drive this stock to 50 cents would keep the pullback moderate. This opportunity doesn't happen very often. A start up that was on the verge of great things( under Joe's leadership) came crashing down to end up in a pile of rubble only to find a savior who may raise us up out of the ashes Phoenix-like to live again. The recent press is a strong indicator of fruitful things to come. And needless to say the best time to buy is before that big beautiful bird takes wing.
IBM Italy but not USA because of resentment???And pray tell, what exactly is that "big difference"? If I remember correctly, one of the early adopters of the ACS was a European financial institution. This could very well be that company. But let me get this straight. If corporations in Europe start buying the product(and by extension, lots of IBM products)IBM USA won't allow any sales because Kozak might get rich off the deal? LOL. Joe Kozak is not the devil incarnate. And what did he do to IBM that you say made them so angry. This would clearly be insider knowledge, except I'm not so sure it's knowledge at all. You've stated in previous posts that Joe embarrassed IBM in front of their clients. Why should we believe you? I guess all we can do is look at your posting history, and make a judgement call. My reliable source says there was finger pointing between IBM and Ants. Now if Joe did that he probably at least had a reason, but....you don't tug on Superman's cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger, and you don't mess with IBM. At the very least it's pretty obvious IBM and Ants are still talking. Note, it says "further discussion" below.
" Dr. Kautzmann, III reviewed the ACS Advanced Architecture (AAA) with Don Haderle, the original architect of IBM’s DB2 data base. Mr. Haderle concluded that the ANTs Advanced Architecture (AAA) was the technically correct approach to universal and complete migration; not the previous ACS, that utilizes a non-semantic formal implementation in the AAS. The Early ACS Architecture (EAA) that was presented to IBM had implementation and performance issues in IBM’s test beds for IBM clients. Further discussion regarding the ACS Advanced Architecture (AAA) for IBM’s or others test beds will begin with the ANTs ACS Advanced Architecture (AAA) completion. This project should be completed in the next 90 to 120 days. Preliminary discussions with potential users of the AAA continue."
One positive thing about your post. You say Joe is holding stock. Now that I believe. And if he is, I wonder why?
The market is clearly not sending the signal of inexperienced traders jumping on board. And I feel in good company. Apparently Rik has been fooled as well.
Oh c'mon, you guys are waaaay too pessimistic. My GTC order is at $5.00
Crazy huh? After all that to this. You just never know. I don't think the majority around here really understand the potential.
Here's an interesting blast from the past.
http://database-diary.com/2011/02/14/update-on-the-ibm-db2-sql-skin-for-migrating-from-sybase-ase/
This excerpt is down in the comments section where some "shareholder" asked Conor his personal opinion of the tech.
"Well, I can tell you what I think about the technology, but I think the more important question is regarding the business value it provides.
At first, I was cautious about taking this approach, because it is based on emulation. I wanted some real world customer proof points before making my mind up. When I saw the results of initial customer tests, I was pleasantly surprised. They certainly exceeded my expectations.
I’m fairly conservative by nature, and my assessment at this stage would be… so far, so good. The technology has proven itself in several environments to the extent that organizations are willing to move important workloads onto this technology. That should not be underestimated. And this technology has the backing of IBM, who does not make endorsements like these lightly.
Now regarding the business value of this solution, that’s where this really shines. Customers can use this technology to 1) significantly lower their costs, and 2) move onto a more strategic database software platform. When you combine these factors, it makes for fairly compelling business value. And that is what matters to these customers. The technology is not the primary consideration. The business value is.
Again, my overall assessment is… so far, so good. When you look at this within the context of a mature, multi-billion dollar database business at IBM, it has successfully navigated the first few hurdles. Where it goes from here, well that is the question…"
Ex, I'm not a member so you'll have to PM me your address, but I think this response might be of interest, so here goes. The basic reason I didn't expect anything in the IBM announcement is that the New ACS isn't ready yet. And when it is ready there will have to be considerable time for testing if they're interested. And there is no indication in anything I read about IBM having an in house product similar to the ACS, and I belive they woud make that very, VERY clear if they did. Since this "PureSystem" line "is intended to bring together all the necessary pieces needed to handle complex computing problems that typically require a combination of products from multiple vendors", it strikes me that the ACS would be a suitable product in that line since it eliminates some of the "multiple vendors". Whatever they name it(if they use it) is irrelevant to me, as long as they use it. Even if they don't, somebody else should be interested. It's ultimately the customer that drives this car. Whatever database they desire to go to is where we should be.
P.S. I'm not a computer engineer(far from it), just technical by nature.
It's an old article, and yes, if it were new we'd be trading above 25 cents. Look at it this way. The new ACS(advanced architecture) is improved over the old version. We just have to get it ready for market.
Nothing strange. And nothing of concern.
" According to the ANTs accounting firm, the corrected valuation for ANTs patents and Intellectual property should reflect very positively on the assets held by ANTs on the new ANTs financials"."
Thanks for bringing that to our attention Tiger. The book value should go up. What are we selling for now... about 6 million? Good grief. With Kautzmann at the helm, a top ex-Oracle salesman signing on, and talks with major players on the world stage there has to be a lot of negative factors to keep us where we are. Frankly, I don't think there's enough, but what do I know.
Investors don't dislike negative information, they seek it out. Problem is, you 've been demonstrably twisting negative information, even going to the point of telling lies, such as when you said Joe was selling stock while telling Investors it was a good bet. You know too much about this company to say something like that by accident. Anyone reading this board for information needs to be fully aware of when a poster has told lies, for obvious reasons. By the way, I can't ever remember Joe selling stock, and if he did it was quite a ways back. He knows the potential here as well as anyone. My bet is he's still holding.
"Right now the jury is still out and has been out for the past two years."
Ain't it grand. I doubt I'll have an opportunity like this for years to come. If you understand the history of this company and current management decisions you know the probability for success.
The implication of the facts is clear. If not for SAP buying Sybase and Ants software issues, Sybase would have been in deep trouble.
Two years have not been completely wasted. From the CEO Corner:
" ANTS marketing group is in early discussions with several Data Base migration providers. Using elements of the Early ACS Architecture (EAA) and adding technical capacity developed in collaboration with other providers would allow ANTs to capitalize on years of work on Early ACS Architecture (EAA) and provide a unique solution to each Data Base migration provider and their clients without compromising ANTs ACS Advanced Architecture (AAA) in the broader marketplace."
Plus, do you know how much of the original coding has been kept? I sure don't
Plus, R&D is never a smooth road. Sometimes you hit a dead end.
A chance???????????
Have you been reading the press lately? Note the bottom entry. Ants has received unsolicited interest from Fortune 500 businesses. And keep in mind this software is good for migrating from ANY database to ANY other database.
"ANTs are in negotiations with SAP, China regarding their existing client projects involving the AAA (ACS Advanced architecture) as well as long term projects and licensing of other ANTs non-exclusive IP products. Service and support contracts are contemplated.
ANTs is in negotiations withIBM, Italy regarding their existing client projects involving the AAA (ACS Advanced architecture) as well as long term projects and licensing of other ANTs non-exclusive licensed IP products. Service and support contracts are contemplated.
• ANTs has been contacted by a well known and respected New York Venture Group that provides revenue accelerating direct sales C-level marketing. They have successful direct C level contacts and relationships with FORTUNE 500 companies including Chrysler, Ford, Glaxo SmithKline, Chase, Boeing, Time Warner, Johnson & Johnson, Verizon, Pfizer, FedEx, Citigroup, The Hartford, Wal-Mart, Procter & Gamble, JP Morgan and General Electric to name a few. The New York Venture Group is a senior enterprise technology marketing group. Their interest is in the AAA (ACS Advanced architecture) and other ANTs IP non-exclusive licenses. ANTs contact by this firm was at the request of several of their FORTUNE 500 clients regarding the ACS."
Alright, this time without the editorial comment. I should point out this link goes to a Sybase evangelist's blog, and they were justifiably scared, so he came out swingin' as I pointed out yesterday in post #14132. Notice how the Sybase guy ends his blog - "Oh yeah, and stealing is bad." Good grief, how about stealing from customers?
"SOunds like they are doing it themselves now."
I don't agree. What about the article would lead you to that conclusion?
Going back and reading your post I may have been confused. I thought you were referencing that article Gold posted as well as your link. At any rate it doesn't change anything about my comments.
Not that article, the one that Gold56 posted.