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.
Well stated.
The shareholders paid off the massive Ferris Productions debt and gave Ferris the money to develop the IVR. Ferris' behind-his-back discussions with S&W got rid of Jones, and Dalby got out as soon as he saw how little concern Ferris had for the people who funded his development and paid his bills.
After those two executives were moved out of the way, who became the CEO? Why, Ferris, of course.
Since Ferris took over, he's issued almost 100 million shares (60% of the outstanding shares) to his board cronies. (Go back and look.)
You have to give Ferris credit. He had one heck of a vision on how to rid Ferris Productions of its debt via the public company route, only to essentially go all the way back to again having his own little company with his old college roommate.
Sweet deal.
"Cheated?" Ferris doesn't even give you that much thought.
That's OK. It's their company, isn't it? After all, they started it ... and keep finding suckers to bail them out...
If a tree falls in the woods and nobody hears it ..... Wait, I do believe somebody heard this tree fall a few days ago with all that volume!
I'll also bet that Bob's about to become our good "friend" again ... for the next few weeks before the meeting ...
I've been away for awhile. Nothing going on with this company.
Then I see a press release. Let me see, the company's PR geniuses put out a press release announcing a sale, and don't even put the company's name in the headline? Are you kidding me?
Sadly, these guys are more inept and bigger morons than I thought.
This is all nice and well, but I'm reminded of the old saying: "If a tree falls in the woods and nobody hears it, did it make a sound?"
Nothing matters until Ferris realizes this is no longer his own little private Ferris Productions to run into the ground.
Remember his promise to be concerned about shareholder value?????
Anyone notice the share price is at its lowest point since August of 2009.... but Ferris says he cares about the shareholders and shareholder value, so I feel better now....
Cool. We shareholders received a turkey for Thanksgiving! How thoughtful of VTSI management.
What happened to Miller the saviors?
Urgent call to VTSI management: Anybody home?
Yes, BF, we are talking to you!
Cares about shareholder relations... Yeah, right, when he wants something.
Bob, some people paid for your toys!
I'm not a bear. I am a realist.
Ferris has had the company stuck in neutral so long that newbies are seeing the same old thing from years ago and are thinking it's new.
You really think this is the first time VTSI has been to IACP?
I'm very disappointed to be correct .....
I truly believe this is why Bob decided years ago to give up fully-reporting status. A terrible mistake.
You missed my point.
Of course, I'd like to see this company on the Nasdaq.
My point is that the company needs to re-gain "fully reporting" status, which it could do with an intermediate step to the OTCBB.
I truly feel that the jump from the Pinks to OTCBB is bigger and more important than the step from OTCBB to Nasdaq.
However, I think it's all moot. Bob has this company exactly where he wants it. He has his playtoy and is answerable to no one.
Rusty, have to disagree just a litle.
Full fledged OTC -- where we were before Bob foolishly decided to let it go -- is "fully reporting," meaning audited financials and periodic reportings (10-Ks and 10-Qs) are required.
While, of course, Nasdaq or Amex would be better than OTCBB, in my humble opiniom without a doubt the company's share price would be substantially higher on the OTCBB.
I've said it a gazillion times. There are two different things in place here. One, the quality of a company, and second, the quality of a company's share price. We care about the share price. Pink sheet companies have no quality of share price.
Interesting thought:
What happened to the company's BS last year at reverse split proxy time that they needed to be off the pinks to do business with the larger companies .... ?
Thanks for sharing.
This means we're on the pinks for another year -- probably mid-2013 at the earliest.
Nice. Very investor friendly (not!)
Ummm, no. Months and months.
Believe what you choose. You are, unfortunately, wrong.
Just because I choose not to reveal the extent of my knowledge about the IVR's development and operation doesn't make my comments about Zane being the true "genius" behind the IVR less true.
I'm through with this subject. My comments are there for people to evaluate as they see fit.
Actually, you did just disparage Zane's memory, and I find it highly offensive.
Ztect, you're above that.
I don't know who actually designed these IVR simulators, but they would not have operated successfully at the early shows without Zane Horton's magic at the simulator's control panel keeping the things operating. He repeatedly patched them together to give the appearance of a flawless product.
Yes, I saw it.
Let's don't blow this out of proportion. I was just pointing out that there are certainly other "geniuses" in these products' development other than Mr. Ferris, who likes to take credit for everything.
Yes. Just ask anyone who was at the early Itsec or other IVR unveilings.
Zane was the "genius" behind these simulators.
A name that should not be forgotten.
The late Zane Horton was the "mad genius."
Couldn't have said it better!
My bigger concern goes to the fact that we've had essentally this same technology since late 2004. How much longer will our window of opportunity to penetrate the market remain open?
Bob's wasting not only our money, but our investments' opportunity.
Actually, You can also "withhold" your vote at www.proxyvote.com by entering the 12 or 14 digit number in the box on the proxy materials you received from your broker.
Took me less than a minute.
SF, you are dead solid correct.
Bob finally got some help on proxy votes, and this vote is nothing more than Bob and the boys testing their newly-found ability to control the next, more important vote.
It's elementary that a board of directors stays in place until their successors are elected, so, even if it fails, this election really accomplishes nothing.
Someone finally advised Bob (or Bob finally listened) about "NOBOs," or "non-objecting beneficial owners." When your shares are held in street name, and you don't object, the brokerage house is free to vote your shares as it deems appropriate, which, if they bother to vote, is usually with management.
For those of you holding in street name and who have received the proxy materials from your broker, please understand that doing nothing allows your broker to vote as it pleases. Thus, unlike the prior failed proxy, doing nothing is likely a vote "for" the management-recommended slate of directors.
The only way for "street name" shareholders to vote against the slate of directors is to return the broker proxy card back to your broker in the "business reply" envelope, instructing the broker to "withhold all nominees."
This exercise is not about electing a board of directors. It's a test of management's voting control for the next proxy which will really matter.
Yep. Ben away for awhile. Boring here.
Received the proxy. Haven't yet really looked at it, but I'm guessing it's like the other one, where not voting is the same as a "no" vote.
Puzzled why they'd waste all this money to simply re-elect Ferris. his old college roommate who's been with the company since the old failed Ferris Productions, and the third guy.
Odd.
Despite my oft-criticized decision to drop the company's fully-reporting status, here's my biggest concern.
Whatever we may think of VTSI's best-of-field simulators, the truth is that the IVR system is getting very long in the tooth without penetrating the market. It was introduced at I/ITSEC when? December of 2004?
For all of you who think Ferris is the technological genius of this company, you never met Zane Horton. With Zane's unfortunate and untimely death, how is VTSI going to keep an industry-leading product?
Without Zane's genius, and with Bob's proven (over and over again) business ineptitude, and utter lack of concern or respect to those who have provided the company's capital, what's to look forward to?
Again, Burlen was Ferris' college roommate. What else do you need to know?
Whatever you might think of prior outside management, from Jones to Dalby to Kitchen to Andrus, and at least three CFO-types, they have two things in common. They were outsiders, and Ferris ran them off.
Sober thoughts.
100% inept. Amazing ... and unfortunately, quite revealing.
Ferris = engineer.
Wonder why the comapny's CEOs and CFOs keep leaving the company? It's all in the preceding paragraph.
While I mostly agree with your conclusions (actually, I think there's more to the story and Ferris got taken advantage of), I completely disagree with your conclusions about noncompetition agreements.
Without question, properly prepared noncompetition agreements will be upheld if reasonably necessary to protect the employer's interests. However, you have to have them in place before the disclosure of the confidential information.
I was under the impression that VTSI used to have these things signed as a matter of course. Didn't the company (back when it was a reporting company) disclose litigation seeking enforcement against a prior v-p?
Anyone have any information about that?
My complete and uneducated guess, having observed Ferris' aversion to paying quality professional fees (remember the attorney not in good standing?), is that he cheaped out, didn't get proper counsel on these important arangements, and gave away the company's secrets without appropriate protection.
When he tried to get the cows back into the barn, they bolted with the information and training they had already received.
This is just a complete guess, although founded upon having observed Ferris' operations previously.
You're not really serious, are you?
Ever heard of a registration statement?
Exactly how many shares did Ferris issue into the public market to fund his objectives? 100 million?
If you sell shares into the public market, you owe an obligation to those purchasing shareholders to treat them other than as mushrooms.
That's my problem with Ferris. He has no respect for investment capital. Over and over again, even back to the Ferris Productions days, he's told a good story to raise capital for his objectives, and then abandoned the investment capital.
Thanks for your unsolicited advice. I will sell when I want to.
In the meantime, I'm going to feel free to criticize management all I choose for its obvious and complete disdain for those of us who made the company's expansion possible.
There's a pattern here if you'll quit critizing posters and look around.
There is a huge difference between a successful company and a succesful stock.
I bought a stock, and it's not succesful.
Answer: original due date.
However, this company is not fully-reporting. Very odd.
Sure does a lot to rebuild shaken shareholder confidence, doesn't it?
Amazing! Complete ineptness.
This is at least the second head internal accountant who has left the company. Now Ferris' old college roommate is in charge of financial and accounting.
Anybody feel good about that?
This is not good.
Ferris is the CEO. Yet another naive reliance on a trusted "expert."
Bill:
Bravo on your e-mail, but could not disagree more on your thoughts on the company "going dark."
I invested a significant amount of money in this company when it was fully-reporting, when I could count on audited financial statements and accurate management reports in SEC-required 10-Qs and 10-Ks.
For whatever reason (and I will always believe that it was so Ferris could place that bogus and non-SEC accounting-recognized IR "value" on the books), Ferris chose to go non-reporting.
Ferris' excuse about the cost of complying with fully-reporting status was also bogus, as it's going to cost the company a whole lot more in money and time to regain this status than would have been required to maintain it.
Whatever you want to say about Jones and Dalby, at least the company gave us numbers and management reports that we could count on.
I, for one, and angered about this game of "going dark" whenever Ferris doesn't want to mess with those of us who have made his successes possible.
That's not how the process works.
First, they need two years of audited financials. Those financials are then blended into a very complicated and sophisticated registration statement which is filed with the SEC.
The SEC will then very carefully review the proposed registration statement, and weeks after filing, will issues a series of "comments," or SEC-perceived deficiencies, which requires revisions and re-filing. The process can go on for many months before the SEC accepts the registration statement. Only then is the company fully-reporting.
... and it's a very arduous process to get the audited finacials and registration statement approved by the SEC. Usually several rounds of SEC comments and refiled revisions.
The company prepares the registration statement to become fully reporting and move to the OTCBB. I haven't checked in a while, but it used to take two years of audited financials.