Steetstylz I was writing code for computers 26 years ago, when the commodore 64 computers were around and since you challenged by knowledge of the subject and your post remains I hope the moderators extend the same courtesy to my reply.

As to how many systems the cell phone have, give me a break. There are 5 and NEOM so far has 2 done.

And NEOM had the money to hire good programmers, we know for a fact, because they just gave away 6 million dollars which could hire a lot of good programmers.

Yes some on the board here were jubilant, to the extent they attacked those who saw the acquisitions as a major issue. Some on this board pointed out how small these acquisitions were, and how they appeared to be near bankrupt, but again were attacked. Some here even had issues with the dilution that these caused, and the need to rush and move up the shareholders meeting to authorize the xtra shares needed. If I am not mistaken one poster here even broke it down as to how many shares they were short when they made the acquisitions, but they made them anyway, even before the shareholders approval.

But those not so jubilant were under constant attack for their negative views. And as it turns out those negative views were more then warranted in this forum.

whoopty doo..they said the launch would occur in the UK and the last I checked the UK spoke English. Have you heard of any launch campaigns to take place in the other countries mentioned? The priority should of been on the chinese language since they announced a client for that language a while ago.

That was obvious wasnt it when they launched the pilot program in Fort Myers, and launched with their in house vendor, and a product that very few who read the paper would be interested in. That alone should of told everyone they dont have a clue on bringing a product to market.

By the way has anyone asked how that program is going and what they are doing to make that business thrive while waiting to be sold? Oh yeah the answer is watch for information in future press releases.

You have tgot to be joking. The management ran the pps into the ground with their previous press releases and their mis management, and they tell you keep watching the press releases. Maybe you should go mow the grass some more too huh well they screw up some more.

Where the pps is at now will take a very long time to recover, and all they can say is keep watching the press releases for more info as its released. What info, that they are forced into bankruptcy from mismanagement?

I am so POed that they didnt get these cell phone platforms up and running over a year ago, and they act as if everything is normal.

Someone asked how anyone is making money selling at these levels. They arent making money since these are 2 year lows, and are running for the door because they believe like I do that management dropped the ball in getting this product to market when it should of been brought to market in the EU at least 2 years ago.

Did you read this post the other day which is from the people at ONE and a response to a question sent by a poster here?

There is ZERO revenue from the ONE campaign per this response

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15138666

Clarify what..you just made my point is all you did.

How long have picture phones been on the market?
Hint::::::Its not been a year or two has it? Been much longer.

And to clarify your remarks about Microsoft, how big a file is VISTA and how big is the QODE file that some have downloaded? You talk about QODE working multiple platforms? Whoopee. You write a small program for each platform as they are now doing, then integrate each one into QODE as they are done. That as I stated should of been done years ago, when their technology was sitting there waiting on the phones as even the CEO states was the case.

It is my understanding that ONE is a for profit organization who elected to donate their profits to charitable causes. There is a big difference between a charitable organization, and a for profit organization that gives away their profits.

So yes a for profit corporation can be charged for services provided. Yes that would reduce the amount of profits they could donate, but at the same time it puts some money in the coffers of the company that has expenses of running their campaign for them. Whats wrong with charging even a reduced rate, so that at least your costs are covered? So they give to charities, about every major company in the world gives to some sort of charity or another, whether it be local support or outside their operating area. So should we give the product away to everyone that gives charity, like the RJRs, the drug manufacturers, Microsoft etc?

It appears that ONE is going around to anyone they can get a free campaign from, to maximize their exposure and their good deeds at the expense of these other companies.

By the way I think charitable operations can not charge more then their required operating costs for their products, so a charitable corporation has no profits to give away.

The DD on this message board is the worst I ever saw, and if you recall I was attacking this company and its management from day 1.....What does that have to do with DD? If you mean all the crap about xyz maybe making a deal with NEOM thats funny.

And if you are gonna comment on what I did or what my motive are get your facts straight before you do. Besides I believe your comments are off topic, since they focus on me and not the STOCK, but for the record I never bought shares at .40 so go find the post where I state that I did.

And the reason I bought more shares when I did I made clear in a post about 8 months or so ago. Not because of great DD on this board, I wasnt even here when I bought them. I expected the 3rd quarter of 2005 to start showing results as I explained back then. When the 3rd quarter didnt show results after I had bought more, is when I contacted the CEO who then had Kaminer return the call for him.

What part of that dont you understand, that I have to keep correcting your mistatements about why I am here? As if you know why I am here to begin with, other then for the reasons I have stated at least 5 times here, and I know you read all 5 of them along the way.

I didnt say making a profit, I said that it should be in use by some major marketers. Especially since in 2003 I believe it was NEOM had announced a couple partners in the EU, which is 2 years ahead of the US for this technology. If I am not mistaken wasnt 12snap one of their EU partners back then?

And since you asked the question, if NEOM was ahead of the game as they always claimed, why are companies like DOCOMO ahead of them? Remember they patented the technology in 1995, and all that was left was to get the product to work on the picture phones when they came out years ago. I guarantee you Microsoft or Google still wouldnt be messing around with how to get the program to work on different cell phone platforms. Thats the difference in smart management hiring good programmers and not so smart management trying to go it with novices.

When they announced the launch in 2003 and 2004, the software should of been operating on all platforms by beginning of 2005 the latest, and here they are still working on it. Microsoft or MC or any of the other software programmers could build an entire operating system in the amount of time or less its taken NEOM to put together a small program to make its software work on a cell phone platform.

yes.....this product should of been on the market and in use by mid 2005 the latest with some real marketing firms using it.

at this point in time the question should be who is the next big client and not who will be the first.

The keyword registry should of been producing revenue in significant amounts.

and the dilution should not of occurred to begin with, in the scale it has.

so yes some of us would still be critical of management if the pps was going up and the recent prs were out there.

the total amount that the purchase agreement called for and that were later filed for registration on the S-3. I dont know the exact number but just look at what was filed on that last S-3 and you can add them up for each sub to get a total.

yes they recieved restricted(unregistered shares) at the closing.

we dont own the subs.there is currently a huge amount of cash owed the subs before we can claim we own them. If the pps stays where its at now those subs might own us before its all over with. NEOM has nothing to offer them at this moment since all our intangible assets are held by CORNELL.

Thats right Jonsie. And I sure hope that some day in the distant future I am wrong so my investment pays off as well as everyone elses here. Its funny how you can be right for nearly a year and some still think you dont have a clue. And as is always the case if the date keeps getting extended at some point in time I will have to be wrong, so whats an appropriate time to judge someone by. SOON as NEOMROCKET puts it. IN the future as some have put it.

Analysts work on a 12 month time frame, and even in that time frame they modify or adjust their opinions based on occurring events. I laid out my 12 month opinion and funny when this poster is asked to he says he dont have a clue. Dont have an opinion but is attacking someone elses? Now that takes the cake.

yeah and they have the right to buy that 7.5 percent back at the market price, and watch and see if they dont ata date in the near future, once all their contracts start falling into place and they dont need the 6 million war chest we gave them.

Sure you dont have a clue or an opinion because you are too busy focusing on what other posters motives here are. And I thought I saw a post by MATT while I was away instructing moderators to clean up and agressively remove such garbage, that adds nothing to the subject of NEOM.

We dont even own sponge anymore, so those awards are irrelevent to NEOM and shouldnt of been allowed to stay posted. But it figures the one we let go is the one gets the award. And a few here said SPONGE was garbage and that was a smart choice by NEOM management to let them go. Then MEISL gets an award and Sponge gets an award. Really sounds like garbage to me.

Based on what I know now, which is subject to change of course in either direction, based on new developements here are my opinions for 2007.

1. The pps by the end of 2007 will be in the .30 - .50 range.

2. NEOM will still be struggling to get QODE accepted by the masses, but the subs that NEOM can hold onto will help offset some of NEOMs own internal losses.

3. The subs in the EU will be out performing NEOM and NEOMs Qode.

4. QR and DATA MATRIX codes will be the standard of choice not requiring NEOMS QODE or patents. That may change at a later date, but I dont see NEOM being the favorite in 2007.

5. NEOM will have a niche of marketing firms who have smaller marketing budgets, but the bigger vendors will be going with the big guys and paying the premium price, for the added exposure they can guarantee and NEOM can not.

6. Cell phone providers will be expanding the marketing allowed to their subscribers, via advertising over the cell phone on an opt in basis by the subscriber.

Someone will save this post and 6 months from now pull it out to point out how wrong I was if any of this dont come to fruition. Thats why I stated clearly above these opinions are based on WHAT I KNOW AT THIS TIME AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE SHOULD SIGNIFICANT MATERIAL EVENTS OCCUR.

I guess you see now its proven as I suspected it was, and as to your question about free giveaways thats a laugh. How often does a company have to go back to the same vendor and offer free giveaways to get that vendor to use its products?

This is the second campaign with ONE isnt it? And if they liked the product after the first one, why arent they paying for the second go round? And why is NEOM not charging the second time around? If we have to give the product away to the marketers what good is it? And so far we have basically only seen give aways.

Those who think management has no control over share price are in fact the confused ones. Lets start of list of things management and not the shareholder controls and see who has the control. Sure the day to day fluctuations management cant control, but they definately control the direction the pps is going in. I will start the list and others can add to it as we go, just so some here can see how confused they are as to who controls the direction of the share price.

1. Mergers and Acquisitions are management controlled and as we have seen have an impact on the pps when management cant afford those acquisitions. Especially 4 or 5 in a two month period.

2. Acquiring non core companies that are now producing large losses to the shareholder, are in managements control and not the shareholder.

3. The financing is a management function, and the past year and a halfs financing has cost the shareholder dearly, thus turning away new shareholders and causing some existing shareholders to sell.

4. The massive dilution that has occurred is controlled by management, and again has discouraged many new investors and drove away some existing investors. Not to mention also elevated the market cap to a level well above NEOMs real market value based on financials.

5. Management controls the operating expenses and not the shareholder, and to date NEOMs operating expenses are pathetic to say the least, therefore impacting the share price.

6. Management controls getting the product to market, and to date the shareholders have been doing a better job then management, again impacting the share price.

7. Management controls investing their own dollars in the company and not the investor, and when shareholders see management buying they want in as well, thus effecting the share price. Its suprising many of the top officers only hold options and not actual common shares, or very few common shares, thus they have non of their money invested in the company like the share holders here.

I can keep going if you like but I want to leave the oportunity for others to add to the list, but there are at least 4 more I can think of and will post if no one else gets them. So to suggest management has no control over share price is ludicrous.

Clawman, you keep going on about using the paint money to pay off the 5 million note with Cornell.

That note is not a priority at this time as you keep suggesting. Settling the debt owed to the subs and daily operating capital are the two top priorities right now. The Cornell note is not due and NEOM has plenty of time to work out how to pay that off, or at least make the minimum payments required to pay it off by the time it expires, and should not at this time be focusing on that issue. Sure Cornell holds NEOMs intellectual property as collaterral, but I for one am not worried about that. When the time comes that the note is due, NEOM has plenty of assetts that can be sold to settle the 5 million debt, without risking the patents, even if it means selling another sub at a bargain price.

But if all goes as so many here have claimed, in the next several months, the note wont even be an issue when it becomes due. I personally dont believe the claims here that all will be rosy by the end of Q1, 2007 but thats what others are saying anyhow. So I do see the note becoming an issue in late 2007, but by that time the subs have progressed to a point they are worth enough to cover the note, even if QODE isnt producing any significant revenues at that time.

I for one hope NEOM uses the paint money, when and if it sells the business, for operating activities, and hope it ramps up the sales department to get their product out there, and get more marketers on board.

Before you decide to tell someone else whats fact as opposed to whats their opinion, you best do what you told another poster to do and get your facts straight.

The value of a patent decreases with age, and any patent appraisser will tell you that. Anything with a definite life cycle decreases with age, and that includes patents. And thats not my opinion its a FACT.

And when you feel like telling others how to post or how to exercise their opinions, I suggest you do the following in the future, because i have read a lot of your posts that state opinions that read like facts in the past.

As to your assertion that you state as fact that the later patents havent even been put in play yet, that picture is yet to unfold. We do know for a fact a subsequent patent filed a few years after the 1996 patent was considered an add on to the original patent by the Patent office and the date of that add on resorts back to the original patent date as was discussed almost a year ago in this forum. I believe that was the one to include RFID and other technologies if I am not mistaken. And the question is yet to be answered how many of the newer patents are actually considered an extension but slipped through the Patent office like so many do now days. The story on the patents isnt over yet in my opinion, and you dont know whats an extension and what isnt just as I dont. It will take litigation attorneys to figure that out if the time ever comes, and for all you and I know the patent office might reverse some of the patents, like they are doing with other companies now.

We know for a fact that the deadline set by NEOM that you previously defended profusely, has come and gone in silence. That much we do know. And if NEOM is in an LOI with SADA and a deal is struck with Dupont or PPG that LOI would have had to of been voided, which we know did not occur, since its a public document.

And we know that any other company would have prd the fact that the deal with SADA is off the table since they have a new LOI or definitive agreement with a 3rd party.

And do you really think that thewy hadnt been discussing the paint business with all 3 parties long before the LOI was signed. Of course they were. So your statement that putting a deal together takes time I dont disagree with. But I expect negotiations were ongoing for a couple months before the LOI with NEOM and the 3 suitors, and SADA was at the time the top bidder. Thats why in my opinion, they included the other 2 in the LOI because talks had already occurred. So to suggest that I am saying the deal should of been done overnight is disengenuous. By my calculations they have had 4 months at least to talk to all 3 parties. Unless the suitors are new parties all together, which is not what I was addressing in my posts.

But regardless, the ones for weeks here now stating there was a bidding war, are as clueless as I am, yet I didnt see you going after them once. I knew when I posted my theory(and I stated it was only my theory with no facts) the board would light up with attacks. Thats why I didnt post it before, when all the talk of bidding wars started floating around here. So maybe you should focus on those posts with the same veracity you focus on mine, especially when I make it clear mine is my theory only.

""""The LOI died and NEOM has no other suitors, so NEOM lied in the 10-Q to cover it up. Yeah, right.
"""""

And what makes you state that if the LOI died the statement about suitors would be a lie. Just because Sada and Dupont and PPG may have walked away from NEOMs price, dont mean they arent still suitors for the right price. So both the statement that theres several suitors, and the fact the loi died can both be true. And dont forget when the 10Q was prepared, most of it except the financial numbers was more then likely done in September.

As to filing an extension of an LOI usually that never occurs. I havent seen it happen with any company I have researched. Especially with NEOM. I believe several of their LOIs went past the deadline and were extended but not filed, but would have to go back and recheck that.

You dont hyave a clue what my motives are. And contrary to your believe that I came here because you invited me 6 months earlier, I came here to vent my anger at the management at the time, and their stoolie pr person Kaminer. Had nothing to do with you or looking for answers. My coming here had everything to do with the 2003 interviews that the technology was ready, and then I waited a year to give them time to implement it and by the end of 3rd quarter 2004 there was no results over a year later. And when I called the CEO, he chose to have Kaminer return his call, and the guy didnt have a clue what he was talking about. Thats when I did a google search for a message board to vent on, and found this one and saw all the pumping and got even more angry.

By the way who has been the only poster here thats been right about this stock since my first post on this stock almost a year ago. I guess someone knows more of the answers then those who think they do huh?

Its not unsupported. Based on all the facts we have thats the most logical conclusion one can draw from the situation.

NEOM needs the money now.

A deal with any of these others and NEOM would have had to publicly void the LOI since its filed with the SEC.

With NEOMs own deadlines imposed, any agreement from any of the 3 parties would have been announced before the closing deadline set by NEOM.

Yes its my speculation and I told you that it was factless speculation in my first response to you, but its the only theory that fits at this time. People here can talk about bidding wars etc all they want, but NEOM doesnt have the time to wait on bidding wars, and everyone in this forum knows that. If a deal hasnt been reached by now they are in big trouble.

By the way arent you the one that repeatedly has stated NEOM will use the paint money to pay off the 5 million to Cornell? What are they going to use for operating expenses from January on?

If there was a bidding war a deal would of been signed by now. If there was a reasonable offer a deal would of been signed by now. So thats why I expect neither has occurred. NEOM needs the money now, not months from now when the bidding war is over and a closing finally scheduled. They have funds for 1 more month, and even if a deal is reached now, the closing would be about a month away.

I expect there are some low ball offers NEOM has rejected or put on the back burner hoping something better comes along.

And as Jonsie pointed out the term SEVERAL in the filing is laughable. First as I said back when the news came out, if DUPONT and PPG are really interested and were making a good offer there would of never been an LOI to SADA. They left that door open but obviously the offers werent good enough initially. Secondly this was the paints worse quarter since NEOM acquired them, so who is going to pay a premium for this business knowing the numbers. And keep in mind SADA and any other potential buyer got to see these numbers months ago, unlike us investors who had to wait until the deadline for the quarterly filing. And SEVERAL? There was only 3 according to the LOI that NEOM could even talk to as long as SADA and the LOI were still in effect. I guess you can stretch it and say 3 is several, since its not a couple but what the hey.

Yeah, and the CEO ought to know that right? And should not of been telling everyone in 2003 the technology was ready, when its not even expected to take off here for 2 more years. And even then its very questionable whether QR and DATA MATRIX will be the clear winners and not need NEOMs QODE or its patents to accomplish what they want for what the markets ready for at that time. And remember the clock is still ticking on that 1995 patent and 2 years from now, its value will be down to very little since it will be 13 years old already.

I believe Sada and his Global mearketing support are out of the picture.......There was no definitive purchase agreement signed by this date, and the company had said that such an agreement would be filed with the SEC which didnt occur by that date either. I think SADA and his financing partner walked away when they saw the real facts during the DD process.

"the failure by the parties hereto to execute and deliver the Purchase Agreement on or prior to October 27th, 2006, this letter shall terminate and the parties shall be released from all liabilities and obligations with respect to the subject matter hereof, except as provided in the second paragraph of page 1 of this letter."

It was Dupont and PPG I believe so that was no secret for months now. And if they were interested there would have been an agreement of some kind reached and the LOI voided a long time ago. A bidding war dont last 2 months when you committed to a firm closing date as NEOM had done in the LOI and the PR.

GEESH is t6here anything that remotely suggests a bidding war is taking place as some here repeatedly state is whats going on. Thats was my point and GEESH I WONDER WHY YOU DIDNT GET THAT SIMPLE POINT, and have to turn it into whats in a filing and what isnt. I know what goes into a filing and wasnt discussing that. I was discussing how rumours float around here relentlessly with no fact to back them up.

As for the supposed bidding war watch what happens in the end. I expect the original purchaser backed out himself but you dont see me posting that here with no facts to back it up do you. Well I just did and I will now since you provoked it tell you why I think that. When he got to view the actual company records as part of his DD and saw the deal in China wasnt worth crap, and the business is losing money like crazy, the lender may of even backed away, if not the purchaser.

So the statemewnt that several are interested dont mean nothing, unt9il you know at what price they are interested. If its in the range I think it will be in then NEOM will be writing off more losses on that one too, and thats why I think you didnt see a definitive agreement as was stated would occur. And thats why contrary to your earlier opinion that the agreement and closing both would occur buy the 24th didnt happen either. And I see you now modified that to suggest you heard of some kind of delays? THROUGH WHO?

It was to be done on or before the 24th and that deadline has come and gone. Some here are now claiming there is such a bidding war that the deal is prolonged. Yet other then a statement in the 10Q about several companies interested there has been nothing disclosed to indicate there is a bidding war going on. Interested and Bidding are two different things entirely.

Let me e the first to correct you so some here dont claim I only correct the pumpers.

The sale price when you include the stock was somewwhere around 20 million if I remember correctly, based on the stocks guaranteed share price. The cash portion cost them around 7 million with the closing fees etc associated with the purchase.

secondly the paint business did make profits. But that was before NEOM took over control of them and decided to build the new facility in Fort Myers etc. So the business was profitable and went non profitable after NEOM took control, which is a pattern, even with the new subs.

As for the major brand that many here keep harping on daily, none of them have a clue if its the bottles of water that dont hit the shelves until December or what, but as you point out they keep suggesting it every day.

And I will respond to another poster here as well who said it takes time with patents etc to get things off the ground. Come on. NEOM management portrayed this technology to be ready back in 2003 in a TV interview where they stood outside a bookstore scanning books in Fort Myers. They have suggested all along it was ready, yet it still isnt ready for all platforms as another poster pointed out this morning. As that poster correctly stated it didnt become read for any cell phone platform until this year in fact.

And the one issue you didnt point out to this individual is managements poor decisions in its decisions on investments. The IPOINT investment is currantly worthless, and the PUPs invesatment isnt much better off. And speaking of PUPs not only did NEOM purchase a delinquet note from Cornell of PUPs they also invested additional shareholder money for more shares of that company. Then theres all the subs that are losing money the company doesnt have to lose, including the paint business, and still no resolutions, other then taking a 6 million dollar loss on Sponge, well almost 6 million when you factor in the fair value of the 7.5 percent stake NEOM has in them now.

I do mind seeing it when they are pulling other posts for the very same reason. And btw just for the record I think he was off base in going after PV for his statement. I think anyone reading PVs post realized he was saying that running down the street in IRAQ is very dangerous, but that he wouldnt have to take any one up on the offer since he dont believe there will be a big deal announced by NEOM.

I for one didnt see anything wrong with PVs anology, and I served my country 8 years as well.

""""""""IMO, no one is here because people are getting tired of re-hashing the same thing over and over and constantly trying to defend neom/management. """""""

I dissagree with your opinion, and your opinion that others post negatively to enlighten you and others.

First of all on all message boards, when the longs are proven to be wrong in their assessment they ALWAYS dissappear. Sure for many months they keep defending their position, and their belief in management. But those many months are passed, and they now are taking the route traditionally taken on any message board for any stock. There are always the few die hards left behind, but the vast majority dissappear, because their face is covered in egg, and they dont want to face the criticism for their misjudgement. The case is no different for the NEOM message boards. If the stock turns around you will see many resurface, but that dont usually occur either, since they have already cost many new investors a bunch in their ill informed posts.

As to the negativity being posted by some, its not to sway you or any other long, its usually to aleart new investors that come here on a daily6 basis, and offset any pump going on. That way the new investor, who hasnt been here for 2 years like many here, dont have to go back that long to get to the truths. Too many of you here think the negative posters are trying to save longs. The longs made their bed and can sleep in it. The negativity is to educate others so they dont make the same mistakes the longs here made including myself.

You keep using time frames in your posts that obviously have no real value or accuracy. Not a one of your time frames to date has come to fruition, and I am willing to bet that the cash flow positive by 1st quarter 2007 one dont materialize either. If it does it will be a one time occurrance due to the sale of the paint, and then resort right back to losses. But I wonder why you always throw out these arbitrary values, that have no meaning. Did the CEO or anyone in the company say their goal is cash flow positive by Q1 2007? If so I havent read it anywhere.

maybe someone needs to reread their own source material. The 1 year rule applies tosharesof stock that remain restricted, meaning they never got registered with the SEC. Notice that that source alsostatesquite clearly,foranyone with average intelligence understand, thatthe stamp states that the shares remain restricted unless REGISTERED with the SEC. So once an S-3 is declared effective covering and registering those shares, they become eligible to have the stamp removed, whether its been 3 months, or a year from the time they were issued. The one year period is for stocks that DO NOT get registered in that time, not to stocks that do get registered. That source also discusses how restricted shares can be sold after 1 year, with the stamp still on them as restricted sales, as long as other provisions are met. So a older of restricted shares can sell those restricted shares after 1 year even though they are restricted shares. Here is what your source says, and notice it says may not be resold "UNLESS THEY ARE REGISTERED".


"If you acquire restricted securities, you almost always will receive a certificate stamped with a "restricted" legend. The legend indicates that the securities may not be resold in the marketplace unless they are registered with the SEC or are exempt from the registration requirements.

The shareholders are ENTITLED to an explanation. A PR and a filing with the SEC stated unequivically that a definitive agreement would be reached by a date certain, and that the closing would occur by a date certain. Neither statement in the filing or the PR said ON OR ABOUT SUCH AND SUCH A DATE. Both dates were basically set in stone dates, and if neither date is met then the company owes the shareholders and the investment community a correction. Otherwise this could be seen as just a ploy, to draw in investors who may see more value in the company if these deadlines had been met. Not only that it has created an expectation by the shareholders that those dates are firm and will be met. The statement ON OR BEFORE means just that, not after or later or anything else, and the shareholders have every right to expect that committment to be met, or an explanation as to why its not being met.

"""""""""""""Mr. Jensen said that following due diligence and negotiation of material terms of the transaction, the LOI calls for execution of a definitive purchase agreement by October 27, 2006, with closing on or before November 24, 2006.

""""ASSUMING the shares became saleable that day..""""""

Yes Success I saw the word ASSUMING and it does not preceed the phrase THE SHARES BECAME SALEABLE THAT DAY.

The word assuming preceeds the words A STOCK PRICE. In other words they are assuming what the stock price would of been to calculate what their liability would of been, on the date the stock BECAME SALEABLE. You cant rearrange the words in the sentence to make the word ASSUME apply to what you want it to. If they wanted make an assumption about the salable date, then your sentence above would of been the correct structure and it would of read like this.......

"""""Assuming the stock became saleable on Nov 10, 2006, the stock price of .08, which was the last sale price of the stock on that date, would have meant NEOM had a cash liability of 10.1 million resulting from this clause.""""""

Instead the sentence structure was as follows

"""""Assuming a stock price at the time the shares became saleable of $0.08, which was the last sale price on November 10, 2006, NeoMedia would have had a cash liability of $10.1 million resulting from this clause (the “Purchase Price Guarantee Obligation”)."""""""

So you see its a matter of what is placed where in the sentence structure, and the Assumption is being made as to what NEOMs liability would have been based on the relevent factors when the stock became saleable.