Thank you. Clearly shows my involvement hasn't been much help. That is always disappointing. Still I plan to continue both my ownership of WSGI stock and our work on the Argus if our terms are acceptable to management/the board/Glen. The delay on the new Teaming Agreement has been at our end, not theirs. I still love the Argus and its possibilities. WYSIWYG.

Dear Monty, last week we got our last signature on the TAR/Demeter separation documents. It took some time because we had all our principals and related companies sign. But the agreement is now final. We are working on the revised Consortium agreement where Demeter replaces TAR on the Consortium. Since 8-k's are still being issued I would assume that the company will put one out if/when we propose one and it is accepted. That is just an assumption. Qui sait ce que l'avenir nous réserve? Pas moi!

I would wonder why they don't use TRKK stock. Was it some strange number like 2,222,222 shares? Last I checked, though, TRKK wasn't trading so maybe that is it. No one wants to touch TRKK stock? Still, they got so close with LJC, too bad they haven't finished it.

Actually the Argus was always stored deflated. Still no final documents separating Trident/Demeter research interests. But we are close. Will let you know as promised. Safe travels, Monty.

LOL, just did. I can't answer for WSGI, of course--and shouldn't. Just as I hope Glenn doesn't answer for Demeter! But, hey, it is an understandable time to be grumpy.

I am going to answer you with two points (but don't hold your breath for my next reply because my day is already collapsing with some India emails that are NOT WSGI related, I have run out of week before I have run out of work)--

1. In 2012 at a pizza shop in Dayton, Ohio, the CEO of EWA asked Drew and I to help WSGI if we could. I think that was because Tony had just taken over as COB and there were personal connections. I am pretty sure the net financial effect of that help as been a financial loss for EWA, Trident and me personally. Not big enough to whine about but still keeping the activity in the "help" and not profit category. EWA came back from the brink to great success and they do try to help other small companies as a point of culture. Their net effect on Trident and now Demeter has been positive. But, really, I am still around because WSGI is in my "help" column.

2. Personally, I am trying NOT to add to the demise of WSGI. Demeter's care of the Argus was in that "help" category. For the moment, our "absorbing" seems to be of the UAS side of Trident Aerial Recon which includes Trident's role on the consortium. I have been told TAR is closing so that is why I presume the GTC-USA management contract will move to Trident Group, Limited, a company from which I now am separated. So maybe we could say Drew is absorbing that GTC-USA management contract (I don't know this for sure), although the assets like the appliques for example stay with WSGI. David once told me they are worth about $900K each although that may be $450K since there is a backup at each location. Plus WSGI has TRKK stock no one is absorbing to my knowledge. And I have never fully understood the expiration date of the carry over nine figure accounting loss. All the paperwork I see continually affirms WSGI's sole ownership of the Argus and that gives them full veto power of the Consortium.

So, if intentions matter, my intention is NOT to be another pirate plundering WSGI. I do sometimes fear child services will show up and say dad moved to Brazil and I am stuck with custody of the baby. Our attorney however says a receiver is more likely if things go south and they are usually responsible people. I have no indication from WSGI anything is headed that way.

Just wanted to clarify history and intentions. For what it is worth (absolutely nothing except as part of a social media conversation).

I would benefit, however, if some folks here speculated about certain real questions--

1. Gotcha and others say there seems to be a SP price floor--is there? Why? How?

2. Glenn is the last Director standing--what does that mean in Delaware law?

3. I was looking at my calendar and had a week blocked off for SH meeting. But I had to clear it. No 10-K, no notice to SHs, no SH meeting, right?

Help is defined by those who receive it and not those who offer it. At the moment, the only thing I know I am doing to try to help is trying to redo the Consortium agreement with Demeter and/or designated subsidiary(-ies) replacing TAR. That is consistent with the transfer of all TAR's research projects to Demeter.

Now don't hold your breath until you hear from me again--I have a full couple of days ahead. But I continue to root for WSGI's success and not our failure.

How cynical! :<)

Actually, I am much busier now--be careful what you wish for I guess. But I was on a boring videocon and checked in here with the audio left on in case they said, "What does everyone think about that?" That is when I saw your question. So, with the videocon over let me honor your question.

As was said before, the Argus is in informal custody of Demeter at the moment. That is just because we took over the hangar. WSGI has requested that we tie up that loose end from the spin-off and we are working on it. But, as one might expect, the Demeter spin-off created many complications especially related to TAR research projects. At the moment it appears like we will get them all including the Argus and TAR will close. I don't know but I suspect the GTC contract will be transferred elsewhere in the Trident family of companies. That is just a guess. The papers aren't signed yet, but that is what things look like to me at the moment. When that is done, we need to redo the Consortium documents.

EWA has verbally expressed interest to continue but need to run the agreement through their legal dept once TAR and Demeter have their agreement completed. AVETEC has been acquired twice and restructured. It will probably be easiest to leave them out and contract with Wright State Research Institute for any modeling as it is needed.

We want to keep the agricultural brand of Demeter pure so we may start a subsidiary to hold the research with Drexel, Ohio University, Kucera, EWA, Riverside Research and WSGI (Argus). We probably will put a line in the Consortium agreement that says, "Demeter, Inc. and/or its assigned subsidiaries" to cover that eventuality. If you hear about a new subsidiary that is no funny business just brand clarity--also some task focus. We interviewed a potential CEO for that subsidiary last week--we are still dancing and working on funding.

When we inflate the Argus for static testing or to confirm "as builts" (it is a prototype) people always get excited and gather around. Regionally, it is really good for our company to be associated with it in my opinion. As a shareholder, I wish it was better for WSGI. But you can read into this post that the TAR/Demeter separation complicated things for WSGI. I am sad about that because things always seem to be complicated for WSGI! I think we are close to the end of TAR/Demeter discussions and promised to tell Monty here when the papers were signed. Just not yet. WSGI is waiting for the Consortium to send a new agreement. So, all of that delay has been at our end. Hope that helps!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-29/google-s-solar-fueled-cyber-drone-crashes-during-new-mexico-test

Google’s Solar-Fueled Cyber Drone Crashes in New Mexico Test
by Alan Levin
May 29, 2015 — 11:07 AM EDT Updated on May 29, 2015 — 1:32 PM EDT

A prototype of the massive solar-powered drone Google Inc. plans to build as a platform for delivering Internet service from the sky was destroyed in a crash at a New Mexico test site.

The unmanned Solara 50 fell to the ground shortly after takeoff on May 1 and the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board is investigating, Keith Holloway, an agency spokesman, said in an interview. The accident occurred at a private airstrip east of Albuquerque and no one was injured, he said.

The crash is a setback for Google’s high-altitude vision of how to bring Internet access to areas of the world without sufficient infrastructure on the ground. Titan Aerospace, the company Google bought last year for undisclosed terms, built the drone, which its promotional material says has a wingspan of 50 meters (164 feet). It is supposed to fly above the weather, where it could then beam Internet signals to earth as if it was a satellite.

“Although our prototype plane went down during a recent test, we remain optimistic about the potential of solar-powered planes to help deliver connectivity,” Courtney Hohne, a spokeswoman for Mountain View, California-based Google, said in an interview. “Part of building a new technology is overcoming hurdles along the way.”

The company is in a race with Facebook Inc., which also attempted to buy Titan, a company headed by former Microsoft Corp. executive Vern Raburn. Facebook instead acquired U.K.- based Ascenta, which is designing its own high-altitude drones, for $20 million.

The acquisitions are part of a broader strategy by the two Internet companies of pushing technology in areas such as robotics and mobile phones in hopes of pioneering new markets.

Thin Wings

The upper surface of the wing on Google’s Solara 50 is covered in solar cells to generate power, according to company data. It’s designed with batteries that store electricity so it can continue flying at night and stay aloft for five years.

The drone Google intends to use in providing Internet service will be larger and capable of carrying heavier payloads than the model that crashed.

Titan has also flown a smaller version, the Solara 10, according to a company video. The planes are built with a thin fuselage and relatively long, curving wings that allow them to fly through thin air as high as 65,000 feet (19,812 meters). For comparison, airlines mostly cruise between 30,000 feet and 40,000 feet.

While the Google Solara crash wasn’t a threat to people on the ground, U.S. regulations require the NTSB to investigate accidents of drones weighing more than 300 pounds, Holloway said. The agency hasn’t set a date for when it will release a more detailed report on the accident and its cause, he said.

FAA Interest

The NTSB hasn’t yet posted a preliminary report about the incident on its website listing aviation accidents under investigation.

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, which regulates aviation and had registered Google’s aircraft, is also monitoring the investigation, according to an agency statement.

Google’s Titan subsidiary had registered three Solara 50 drones with the FAA, including the one that crashed. The FAA allows companies to register experimental and test aircraft, and also has a process to approve unmanned flights by manufacturers.

OK, FIFA--sometimes conspiracies are true but I think they are rare IMO.

I read this post a while back and didn't have time to reply. I have wanted an explanation of the volume down here with no news and such a low price and IMO a toxic atmosphere. Conspiracies are rarely true or secret so I like a less complex explanation such as this. Thanks, Mt Bigsky, please post if your opinion changes. Lunch time is over back to work! Best regards, IJO

No, Indy is just busy. I still have all my shares and have sold none since I purchased them. I have no plans to sell.

The Trident/Demeter spin-off is almost finished but not yet. So the Argus is based in a Demeter facility but under the research oversight of TAR/the Consortium for the moment. WSGI is eager to clear that up but it is taking the time it is taking as things do in life. So due diligence on WSGI's part there.

We shop at Giant Eagle not Krogers.

No one has mentioned DRNE's overseas sale either here or over at the DRNE Ihub Board that I can see:

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2015/05/06/Drone-Aviation-receives-order-for-aerostats/7431430931524/
--

It is relevant for the LTA defense industry sector IMO, even if we don't own any of them anymore.

I am relieved to think you don't find the PUMA buys to be significant--random retail then? I really don't have a context to even guess--as I said. Maybe PUMA was the assigned Market Maker? Wouldn't a reverse merger require SH approval--not just BOD approval? Again, I really don't know but I appreciated you looking at the possibilities. I can't imagine I got them all--are there really only four? (Counting merger/reverse merger as one). IMO better to talk substance than just gripe. JMO.

Bonjour, Monty. I just finished a trade commissioners meeting you would have enjoyed. Four fellow countrymen (male and female) of yours there and, as you would expect, they were quite competent and engaged. France seems quite interested in UAVs. It was busy but stimulating. So I was out of it for several days. Thot I would pop in here and see what is up.

What is interesting to me is that no one is discussing the implications of governance. As far as I can tell the only director we presently have is Glenn. I know an 8-K said Dennis was but I never heard him say that or attend meetings. Maybe he did and didn't say anything but I just had no independent confirmation he was a director and he and I still correspond as former coworkers. I always wondered if the 8-K was mistaken.

So we have one, maybe two directors left. I once read that if you are the last director you aren't even allowed to resign. So it seems likely to me that Glenn is in full control and has full responsibility for the company. What are his options? All I can think of is another funding or BK. Perhaps a merger or acquisition? That makes four options--are there more? The Puma buying might mean that Glenn, David and other former staff have close to a controlling interest if Puma did represent a cohesive, intentional buying group and not some strange outlier purchasers. I just don't know. I am not suggesting that any of those four options are good for shareholders. Just keeping the brain in the game.

Thanks for what you have done to make the world a better place, Monty. Best wishes and safety to you. I do remember I promised to mention when the lawyers are done. They aren't yet. :<(

Thank you, Monty. I really like point #3. If we take that at face value, on July 8, 2014 there was a comprehensive written plan that included plans for stratospheric operations, specific payload partners and even milestones that were going to be communicated. Sure would be great to see that document. . . Drew said it existed. That is what Drew's public COB speech said anyway.

As the Demeter web site says my technical team and I were privileged to work on this technology including some specific aspects that are not included in Drew's remarks (ground to air wireless power transmission for example). We are allowed to claim that as past performance for the research arm of our new company. One would presume that those very specialized technologies required specific technical partners that, because they were not revealed by WSGI, only signed agreements with Trident. As I recall, the only milestone Drew did reveal was the major university partnership by the end of 2014 and that obviously did not happen for WSGI.

To Tallman's point, Demeter did not take or claim (for ownership) any of the airship technology, we merely claim as past performance working on the technology. And WSGI did not own the wireless power technology so, obviously, they would have had to license it. But I did witness the bench top demonstration with my own eyes and it was cool.

To Turbodog's point I don't know what is going on but, then, I believe none of the players do entirely IMO. It is a complex game at the moment and I am just a shareholder and FORMER employee of a partner company. Whoever is behind the PUMA buys would be one example of an unknown complexity(I really have no idea of that).

Drew set the grading scale for his tenure last July--did he get TB, B, AB, P, or I in your opinion? Seems like he has dropped out of school though. I am probably going to avoid grading him in a public forum--maybe over a Turkish coffee in the suq sometime, but not here at WSGI Ihub town! I don't agree with demagogue as a characterization though. I have to have this white paper in by 1630 today, so back to work.

First of all, I am not going to blame you at all for the wise skeptical stance you are taking. The attorneys are still working on the TAR/Demeter separation so it is unlikely I am going to be anything other than cautious in anything I say about my time at Trident and the decisions made there. That caution is nothing new here on my part, however. We were allowed to claim some of our airship research as past performance for our web site but, to me, that is just more "possibility" literature like what we find here on the board all the time. I think the possible benefits of a stratospheric airship are well-established. JMO. The question always has been and remains, can WSGI pull it off with or without partners? I think the only creditable answer to that is a stratospheric flight. Again, JMO. Monty, I'm always careful about what I say here whether it looks like it or not. And, at the moment, Demeter has no formal relationship with WSGI. BTW, if you are still here I will let you know when the attorneys are finished. There will probably be some anti-disparagement language but I think I can at least say when the negotiations are over. My best wishes remain with you and yours, IJO.

This is the first I looked at the board in days, TD. We have a white paper (NOT WSGI-related) due at the GAIC in Dayton Friday so I am swamped. I would have to read the "accusations" before I even began to know the context here. I am not by nature a defensive person so I might not even bother. I may reply to Monty before we get ready for a dinner date at 5PM. I doubt if it will be a defense. WSGI shareholders don't need defenses, they need results IMO. My stance is both myself and the newco I lead for the moment desire WSGI to succeed. At the moment we don't have any formal relationship with WSGI, however. We have an informal communication that allows them and their partners to continue any Argus operations they wish out of our airport facility. No sinister conspiracy, just the complications of our spinoff IMO.

As I recall, the "we" in that context was shareholders and management and not Trident and management. And, I am still a shareholder. As to this resignation, how is it a surprise? He set out a trajectory (major university, etc.), failed to achieve it and finally resigned. That is an honorable thing to do IMO.

Thank you for the congratulations. Much work yet to do at Demeter.

As to the hangar at SGH, in the spin-off Demeter took it. I wrote Glenn and assured him Argus operations could continue from it through July 31 at the very least. As of yet Demeter does not have any formal agreements with WSGI but, gosh, we are only eight weeks old and have two new product lines we need to prioritize and execute for our own investors. But we will try to be responsive to all requests for teamwork and assistance. That is just good business IMO.

Busy and effective are too different things are they not? You are making a point about effectiveness and not busy-ness I think.

I believe I said that Ben presently owns 49% of TAR. But it is my understanding that entire $5K goes to Mr. West and one employee who are working that contract.

Trident uses a different web designer from our newco. When I left they were in the process of changing to a new one from their original. Our spinoff means Drew will need a total re-write for TAR. Add the burden of both WSGI and GTC and you can probably use the TAR web site as a metric of how slammed he is. Or the GTCTrack web site. As you pointed out, the 8-K says GTC-USA keeps it but I think OTC is still using it the last I checked. Either one should reveal if he is making any progress. Maybe this week for the newco website--probably going out with a temporary logo, however. That stuff is a lot of work.

Actually I have been busy working on the website (hats off to Coasti for watching) and other start-up issues for the newco as well as the prototyping for our two product lines. If you know the term "boilerplate" that would account for my contribution as you are suggesting. When I was at Trident I wrote some white papers and at least two large business cases related to the airship applications. Drew would mine them for material for WSGI comms.

Unfortunately, I did not get editing privileges so I didn't shape final product. Our web site will have some past performance sections in our UAS and Sensors section that will deal with some of the airship avenues we looked at back at Trident and some will be news to our Ihub family here I think. That is not because they were so secret, just that WSGI and Drew haven't chosen to communicate about them. I understand, unless you execute a product, what good is research by itself I guess?

Hope that answers your question. Would be glad to try again. I just may not be here again for a few days.

My point was that MOST C-Corps are NOT publicly traded companies. Who would want these headaches? And, yes, what I don't know about publicly traded companies would make a great introductory book on the subject. I never pretended otherwise.

Of course others may not know that this is the old Northrup Grumman LEMV prototype. Nice that the British government put some funding into it. The Turks also bought some old LTA UAV technology as well. When I get a chance I will look for a public link for that. Thanks for the post, Pagan. It is nice to see any LTA prototype get a new lease on life.

Respectfully, that is a strangely rigid view of the world. IMO companies can change just like people can change. I am not saying WSGI is presently putting up good evidence of having changed but I am saying IMO it is irrational to say it cannot change. IMO real change would be evidenced by things like transparency and communication, the putting out of a lucid plan for corporate advancement and other things like that. I do know a few folk working hard to make a future for WSGI and I wish them all the best.

Yes, experience does tell me it is hard for people to change so your cynicism has SOME basis. But, IMO, it is just as irrational to insist that everything WSGI will ever do is going to be crooked just as it is irrational to insist that it does all things well. Change is hard but it has always been worth fighting for in my experience, whether individually or corporately. JMO.

Safe travels, Monty. I will try to make some limited comments that should be apparent from publicly available information. One business book I have read recently that I have enjoyed is Coherence by Richard Bailey. In that context, I would say that WSGI shows external evidence of being in a period of realignment. The last publicly available coherent airship strategy in my opinion that was include in a 10-dcoument was "foxhole to stratosphere" that looked at leveraging tactical LTA to get to atmospheric satellites in the form of stratospheric airships. IMO the sale of LTASCorp effectively neutered that strategy.

Publicly available material seems to point to some kind ofrealignment going on in assets (LTASCorp sale, GTC sale, OTC stock), finances (LJC settlement, etc.). governance (change in Board make-up--departure and additions), staff (departures of Barb, David and Dan and addition of Dennis DeMolet). What is the purpose or nature of that realignment? What, if any, strategy does it entail? IMO that cannot presently be discerned from information publicly available at the present time.

It is my hope that if some form of company realignment were to be going on, at some point, it would be clarified and explained and a coherent strategy that includes stratospheric airship development would be articulated and shareholders updated about it on a monthly or at the very least quarterly basis. But I am sure there are other philosophies and approaches to corporate communications. I am just stating my personal opinion of what my personal preference would be.

Best wishes always, IJO

This change in status in the new contract was the lack of non-compete going forward to which I was referring. The retail efforts of OTC should not be unexpected in my opinion since this clause in the contract only makes sense in that context.

Don't turn careful speech into negative speech, but frustration noted. IJO

Just been busy lately--but it looks pretty quiet here at WSGI Ihub town. I liked Over's reminder that airship technology is a likely inevitability. And for us shareholders, it sure would be nice if WSGI is on on it when it happens! GLTALs

By the way, is everyone just catching on the fact that David did not have a non-compete with GTC-USA? I thought that was very clear in the contract IMO. Although, if Coasti is right, he needs to hand the GTCTrack URL back over to GTC-USA IMO.

Doesn't it seem like the OTC plan would be to clone everything that GTC-USA had owned and put the OTC badge on it right away so they can get Great West flipped to the OTC badge? Then you hire a PR firm and start promoting the heck out of it. Next comes the Preferred Share conversions some time or another. JMO but that is the way it worked with LTASCorp last time, so it seemed. JMO.

That wasn't the product. It was even cooler IMO. But, for the moment, both GTC-USA/Trident and GTC-UK/David have their hands full with start-ups, transitions and daily business IMO. It is not a time for another satellite reseller messing around IMO.

Coasti, if you have time please check the contract for us. Seriously. If it accords with this 8-K as you have quoted it then the contract was broken because, clearly, GTC-UK has kept the GTC Track white label for themselves (go look at it). If the contract accords with the 8-K, then IMo the company has a basis for action against. GTC-UK or at least a request for that white label to be returned. This could be useful for the company and we can pass it on to them. Thanks.

Sigh. I think you are not a careful reader. A C-corp is not a publicly traded company--it can be--but they rarely are. We don't do any business with WSGI at the moment. Do YOu care anout sharholders? Just curious.

Just don't want "trimmed" for being off-topic. But, if the mods think we are on topic, Ben is half owner of Trident Aerial Recon. So I guess we are on topic. His first job after graduating from college summa cum laude in seven semesters was as Zone Manager overseeing 16 dealers' service departments for Ford. He always wanted to start his own business so he left Ford to start a pool service company since our family used to own one. So he is 30 years old, about to sell his nearly paid off farm to a developer and owns equity stakes in 4-5 businesses, including the lifestyle pool service company he started with his own savings. Yeah, pretty much I will bet on his character, competence and judgement anytime.

Ahhh, so you don't know all the players. Even better. This Board is about WSGI not Demeter. Pay attention to what is happening.

Gosh, you are a bad reader. We had an idea of how to use trackers and free simplex accounts. David made an agreement for us to proceed but one of our key technical guys had a life crisis and we put it on hold. It is still idling and especially since we don't want to subtract from work on GTC. SM would have been resellers and develop one new product. Still can, just idling for the moment. Never was an intention to get it out there in the publicly traded arena. Unless I see WSGI get fixed, I don't think I ever want to play public again! Those 100 to 1 conversions really turned me off. Not everyone wants to play "shell" games.

I am an archaeologist, I love pagan idols. I have dug plenty of them up. OK, so I don't keep any in my collection because it is a little creepy, but I contributed to the name obviously--just not for Coasti's reason. Argus is not a Christian saint you know.

Its an LLC not a corp. That was a deal with David that still is idling--don't know what we will do with that. But for a pump you need to go public or pick up a shell. No plans for that for anything I own.