lol!

Wow..and I thought I had it bad. At least I still have my mind.

owd;

Oh I see..so you're saying if your wife was a little better looking you'd be buying more shares at these prices. Can't win them all I guess.

Hey owd, what I don't understand at all is your position on this. Are you buying or selling edig at a pps of $.21? I'm trying to figure out what to do.

Disappointing may be the right word-but who really expected all the trials to be successful and result in large orders? Not I.

Ya mon-really! Keep looking for that post-with any luck maybe you'll run into it. LOL!

owd; Although time may prove you right, Ryan Air's test results are probably not be indicative of the DigEplayers success or failure. If more than half of their flights are less than 90 minutes long, it's no wonder not many people rent them. On a flight of three hours or more, I suspect the results may be quite different. IMO.

OT Hotrod;

Ummm...maybe you should just tell her the truth..that aliens came to you in the middle of the night and threatened to kidnap your wife and kids if you didn't buy "enough to count". Now, if she doesn't buy that...well, it's been nice knowing you buddy.

Hotrod;
Tell her you were "MISLED" If that don't work...run.

techwashere;
LOL!

Ditto. Thanks Medrare.

Philo; Just so I don't overload my brain with any more news, I've decided to put the company on ignore for now. LOL! (not really).

lickily; Not until you mentioned it-thanks. That makes me feel a Heil of a lot better. LOL!

Tenderloin: The bad news is they can only afford to buy 6 hours of fuel at a time.

lickly- I'm not sure what that means but if they are really talking about patent infringement then I agree, up to $2.5MM in damages seem like peanuts -especially when $890M was for non performance on supposedly firm contracts. I don't know, it just doesn't sound like a patent infringement issue to me.

lickly; I believe the request for arbitration was because of a lack of performance on a contract-not patent infringement.

earlyretired; You obviously have issues with Canadians, EH?

CES2002; Thanks-I'm still looking forward to expecting something...

prehistory: Yes and No. I've talked to RP but never "heard" anything. The only thing he said was something about expecting a successful year in spite of the uncertainty regarding this quarter's revenues. FWIW

Sorry about that CAL_LAW. I can't respond to PM's so I don't normally check for them but I do I appreciate your reply.

Thanks CAL_LAW. I was just curious (has nothing to do with edig). What article are you referring to?

CAL_LAW; My question was a serious one-does management of a company have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders or not? I'm just curious.

CAL_LAW; Quick question-does management of a company have a fudiciary obligation to its shareholders? TIA.

Seems to me it would be more approporiate for those who already sold their shares and couldn't move on. I doubt I'd still own shares by the time I reached that stage.

Cassandra;
I'd be interested in the SEC's response. And, if you're not a shareholder, why don't you buy ten bucks worth and proceed.

TWOMIL; I hear you but I'm not convinced HH falls into that category (he may be on the verge but he's not RB material yet,imo). I believe a lot of us are guilty of that to some extent and I'd be one of the first to admit it. Obviously no-one likes to fail but some accept failure as part succeeding while others fail to succeed because they are afraid of failing. To me its like hearing a stange noise in your house; you can get up and see what it is and then go to sleep or stay awake all nite fearing the worst. It's a choice we all have to make for ourselves.

Hang in there- I think the mushrooms are quite popular this time of year.

hollywood; I for one do not think you have to provide proof of anything. You have formed a conclusion based on information from what should be considered a credible source and it may be the right one. That said, I can tell you that if my distrust of management reached "a grand scale", I wouldn't be here. I too have talked to RP many times and can confirm that his comments always made me feel like I had to buy more shares. I have since decided his (and FF's) comments are a questionable source of information for deciding to buy more shares, and that is not a good thing. I figure they are either very unlucky in business, poor businessmen, lousy forecasters or good mushroom farmers or all of the above. Each one of us has to figure out which applies to them.

Thanks uncasee; All this hush hush secret behind closed doors stuff is foreign to me. It all comes down to how much confidence you have in management's commitment to fulfilling their fiduciary obligation to shareholders. I would love to get to the stage where it was at 100% but that'll never happen. When it comes to your money there is only one person you can trust 100%; best we can do is get to a comfortable level, which is different for each investor.

uncansee; Nice post. But, you also have to understand that the issue of shareholders preceiving edig management as misleading them is not new and it's not limited to just a few malcontents. My own opinion is that they are not liars but I think they do embelish the facts to suit their purpose. They are quick (too quick in a lot of cases) to disperse positive developments and loath to advise of negative ones. Maybe its because they are too close and too sensitive to shareholder's feelings-I don't know. All I know is that they were not forthcoming enough about the EF-10 deal as well as previous ones, for what reason I don't know. You would think by now they would have figured this out and correct it because this strategy keeps coming back to bite them in the posterior. It is very comendable that some posters are prepared to stand firmly behind management regardless of what they do or say but they are many more (me included) who just want to know the facts, good or bad. I can then deal with them as I see fit. We all (well most of us) have a significant stake in this company and all want the same thing. Sure, investing in an OTC stock is risky, no-one disputes that but there is no excuse for investors to be left wondering about the integrity if it's management, whether it is perceived or not. Just MO.

friendlyfred; I don't disagree with most of what you say and that is why I e-mailed him. I don't like speculating either and told him the shareholders deserved an explanation of their statements but to no avail. Not suggesting it was his fault but... that wasn't the issue.

friendlyfred; His reply was exactly the same (word for word) as the one I got on Tuesday (I posted it #60604). I interpreted his comments about expecting a very successful year in spite of uncertainties regarding this quarter's financials as an offset to the negative connotation surrounding the EF-10 deal. Anyone who interprets it differently -please feel free. I don't doubt someone is better at reading between the lines than I am.

Yer welcome. I'm waiting to see what "a very succesful year means" and wish it wasn't preceeded by the words " we expect". At the same time, I suppose if you're swinging for the fence, you have to expect a lot of strike outs before you hit a four-bagger.

moxa: I take it you mean the "real" reason(s).

chwdr;
Just in case you missed it, I posted the response I got from Putnam regarding the EF-10 issue in post 60604, as promised. Not surprisingly, I wasn't able to extract any explanation from him.

jtdiii; That's pretty much the same message I received from RP today (see my post 60604). I told him that, while I liked the rest the webcast, it bothered me that no explanation of the EF-10 issue was given (which I considered to be quite important regardless of its impact in the overall scheme of things). Although I was disappointed that he couldn't provide me with one, it was apparent that EF-10 seems to be dictating all cummunication relating to the matter.

I watch tedevision whenebber I hab a code.

Sabre68 and all;
As I said last week, I wanted to wait a couple of days after the webcast before bugging edig about the EF-10 issue. I didn't see any explanation posted here in the meantime so I proceeded to ask for one today. Not unexpectedly, no specific explanation was forthcoming because they have to "receive official instructions from Eclipse by Fujitsu 10" first. He (RP)did say they stood behind the statements made at the ASM and that their guidance is based on what OEM customers and partners tell them at the time. They still expect 2004 to be a very sucessful year in spite of the uncertainty regarding this quarter's revenues. I wasn't able to get the answers I was looking for but that was the response, FWIW.

sdr;
OH WELL? If I didn't have so dam much money invested in this company I might be more amenable to just shrug this off. Just to be clear, it's not what was said that I didn't like, it was what wasn't said that perturbs me. Don't get me wrong, I was encouraged by the rest of the webcast but I also feel I am entitled to more details on the F10 deal, that's all. I'm not going to say any more on the subject because, as I said, I want to wait a day or two to see if they shed any more light on it.

sdr; Thanks but I have to disagree with you on this one. As a shareholder, when the president says "we are in full production" I take it to mean just that. Two months later we are told we are on hold with no other details about how many units were built, how it affects our revenue forecasts, how it affects our costs etc. I don't know-maybe it's just me but they skimmed over that important point way too fast for my liking.