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.
Cellphones Get Wi-Fi, Adding Network Options
By JESSICA E. VASCELLARO and AMOL SHARMA
June 27, 2007; Page B1
Vacationing in Oregon recently, Rob Mahoney was having cellphone-reception trouble. His signal, from AT&T Inc., was so weak he couldn't browse the Web.
So he tried Plan B, pressing a few buttons to turn off the smart phone's cellular connection and turning on its built-in Wi-Fi connection instead. Soon, the 65-year-old retiree from Temecula, Calif., was surfing the Web over the free Wi-Fi network provided by his bed and breakfast. It was "as if I were on a laptop computer, not a phone," he says.
Mr. Mahoney is at the forefront of a new trend: running cellphones on Wi-Fi. The technology, which extends landline Internet connections over radio frequencies within limited ranges, is already very popular with laptop users. Now, handset manufacturers want to bring it to cellphones as well, allowing customers to surf at higher speeds -- and in some cases, even make calls -- when their phones are near a hot spot.
While high-end Wi-Fi smart phones have been available for several years, manufacturers of popular handsets are increasingly making the technology standard. Apple Inc.'s iPhone, scheduled to make its debut on AT&T Friday, will use Wi-Fi to let users browse YouTube and other content at much faster speeds than AT&T's cellular network allows. Deutsche Telekom AG's T-Mobile USA is launching a service today with phones from Nokia Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. that will automatically transfer cellphone calls onto Wi-Fi networks when users have access to them at home or at one of the company's 8,500 hot spots. T-Mobile plans to offer similar features on other devices, including a BlackBerry from Research In Motion Ltd., later this year, according to people familiar with the matter.
Operators have resisted selling Wi-Fi phones in the past, fearing that such devices would eat into revenue from voice and data plans by allowing customers to cut back on cellular-network usage. They also worried that Wi-Fi could become a Trojan horse for third-party services that allow cheap or free Internet calling. While such mobile Internet calling services aren't widely available to date, they do exist. EBay Inc. offers a mobile version of its Skype service for Windows Mobile phones that has been downloaded more than five million times. The iPhone won't include any software for making Wi-Fi calls, but Skype and other companies say they are interested in developing such services if Apple will allow them.
While some carriers explicitly ban users from making Web calls over their own high-speed "3G" networks, operators don't currently have the technology to easily detect and block users from doing so over Wi-Fi.
Some carriers, though, are starting to warm to the technology, seeing it as a complement, not a substitute, to their networks. They think Wi-Fi can help them ease network congestion as mobile media applications like video hog more of their expensive bandwidth. And some are finding ways to use Wi-Fi to their advantage, offering Wi-Fi-based voice calls as a premium service.
In any case, much of the mobile industry believes mobile Wi-Fi is here to stay. By 2011, nearly a quarter of all handsets shipped world-wide will have Wi-Fi, according to ABI Research, up from just 0.2% in 2006. "Wi-Fi is becoming just another network consumers can access on their phones," says Jim Balsillie, co-chief executive of Research In Motion
Wi-Fi phones detect that they are in range of a Wi-Fi connection in much the same way that a laptop does. Tapping the network generally requires the user to hit a button selecting the Wi-Fi mode. Some operators will automatically switch users on to whatever connection is stronger -- cellular or Wi-Fi -- without them knowing.
Using Wi-Fi on a phone can carry benefits like faster connections and stronger access in areas with weak cell reception, including remote college and corporate campuses. Users could also scale back their voice and data plans if they used Wi-Fi instead of cellular service.
But using Wi-Fi on a phone comes with other hassles likely to keep users from scrapping their cellular plans entirely. Wi-Fi can sap a phone's battery life significantly. And because its coverage is fairly localized, users could get kicked off while trying to use the connection over long distances.
To address these concerns, operators are developing a variety of technologies and services, some of which try to handle the handoff between Wi-Fi and cellular connections more seamlessly. T-Mobile's new service, which will automatically transfer cellphone calls onto Wi-Fi networks, will have an introductory price of $10 a month on top of a monthly calling plan, and it will work initially with Samsung and Nokia Wi-Fi handsets.
T-Mobile, the most aggressive Wi-Fi adopter, hopes to eventually embed the functionality into most of its phones. The phones will work with any home router, but T-Mobile will sell two types -- free with a mail-in rebate -- that it says will boost battery life and be easier to set up. "We've made it really simple for the average consumer to use this technology," says Joe Sims, T-Mobile's executive vice president of product development. "They don't need to understand Wi-Fi."
Other operators are being more cautious, offering some phones with Wi-Fi but stopping short of developing a separate service for calling. Verizon Wireless, which is jointly owned by Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC, and AT&T have both tested a T-Mobile-like service that draws on technology embedded in phones to allow users to switch between Wi-Fi and cellular connections for calling, but neither has announced plans to deploy it.
AT&T, which has about 10,000 hot spots, says it sees Wi-Fi as a convenient alternative when customers are out of range of the company's high-speed network. "We view Wi-Fi as a complement to our broadband and high-speed networks," says AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel.
Nokia this week announced that it plans to introduce two more Wi-Fi handsets in the U.S., offering the devices, which will retail for around $400, to businesses through IT distributors and to consumers directly through several online retailers. To use the phones, consumers can swap in a compatible SIM card.
I know, I'd love to go but I have visitors coming in town. I don't remember them ever having a shareholder meeting before. That's a good sign.
This article from today's WSJ is a good inspiration too:
T-Mobile USA Inc., the fourth largest U.S. wireless operator, is planning a national launch this summer of cellphones that can roam on Wi-Fi hotspots in homes and coffee shops, carrying calls over the Web to improve indoor reception and help customers save on monthly cellular minutes. The service, known as Hotspot at Home, has been in trial in Seattle for a few months and the carrier is ready to roll it out nationwide as early as mid-June, people familiar with the matter say. The phones that currently work with the service are models made by Nokia Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. Customers in the trials pay $20 on top of their monthly cellphone bill to use the service, with a $5 additional monthly fee to add another family member. The pricing may be tweaked for the national launch and the service will be available in T-Mobile stores and through some retail partners, the people said. Thus far, consumers have used hotspots like the ones T-Mobile has in Starbucks shops, airports and elsewhere to access the Web with laptops. The new service lets people use those same networks with their cellphones. When a user comes in range of a hotspot, a call is supposed to be transferred onto the Wi-Fi network, with no noticeable change for the user. T-Mobile has had some technological problems with the project, such as making a smooth handoff between the cellphone and Wi-Fi networks and maintaining battery life, people familiar with the trials say. Many of those issues have been ironed out in the latest versions of the Wi-Fi phones, those people say. T-Mobile USA, a unit of Deutsche Telekom AG, declined to comment on its launch of the service. Customers can use their existing wireless router with the new service, but T-Mobile offers its own special router for free, with a $50 mail-in rebate. The company said its router will enable better service, including longer battery life. One feature that might be added later to the T-Mobile router but not in time for the national launch, people familiar with the matter say, is the ability to plug in ordinary landline phones, which would make T-Mobile a direct competitor to landline phone providers like Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc. That would be especially useful for families with multiple cellphone users. Instead of choosing one cellphone to work on the Wi-Fi connection at home, families could share a single landline. T-Mobile isn't the only wireless operator trying to fuse its cellphone network with Wi-Fi-capable phones. AT&T's Cingular Wireless and Sprint Nextel Corp. have tested similar services. In Europe, British Telecom, Telecom Italia and Orange are also launching Wi-Fi phones. Jeffrey Nelson, a spokesman for Verizon Wireless, a joint venture of Verizon Communications and Vodafone Group PLC, said the carrier isn't convinced that Wi-Fi technology, which operates on unlicensed frequencies -- a public park of radio spectrum -- is high-enough quality to carry the carrier's voice calls. "There is no way to put the controls around that service to give our customers a guaranteed great experience," Mr. Nelson said. Frank Hanzlik, managing director of the Wi-Fi Alliance, a trade group that certifies that handsets comply with Wi-Fi standards, said the biggest opportunity might lie not with consumers, but businesses, since people spend so much time in their offices, where cellphone service can be weak. "I think that enterprises are going to drive this trend aggressively," Mr. Hanzlik said. "That's where the low hanging fruit is." Companies like Cisco Systems Inc. and SpectraLink Corp. have already been pushing sales of Wi-Fi handsets to businesses, though they don't double as cellphones. T-Mobile's new service shows the company is intent on leveraging its network of over 8,000 hotspots in the U.S. even as it plans to upgrade its cellular-phone network to offer "3G" broadband services. Last year, T-Mobile acquired $4.2 billion of radio spectrum in a Federal Communications Commission auction to build such a network. T-Mobile's 3G strategy will center on social-networking applications and hyper-personalization, according to a person briefed on the company's plans. T-Mobile, which has 25 million subscribers and is a key growth-driver for parent company Deutsche Telekom, hopes its new initiatives will attract new customers as it competes with larger carriers like Verizon and AT&T in a nearly saturated U.S. market. All the initiatives are part of a brand transformation T-Mobile initiated last fall, when it dropped longtime pitchwoman Catherine Zeta Jones and launched a new marketing campaign with the tagline "Stick Together." The company's new "My Faves" phones let people call any five numbers, wireless or landline, for free. T-Mobile says My Faves has been adopted more quickly by its customers than any other service the company has offered.
Glad to see most of the longs are still around. I'm also glad to see that that the company changed its business model. Making actual phones would not have been realistic. The big players have hundreds or thousands of patents that CLYW would have infringed on or would have to swap its own patent for a free license and would probably have never seen much royalty income. This is off our chest now -- exiting times indeed.
I agree Charles. Just the fact the a well established companies is willing to sell shares to another company is evidence that they must be confident in their business perspective.
Also, they would not waste their time developing products for them if they would think it would not go anywhere.
This stock is a hidden gem. Their new hip-e computer caught my eye at the Microsoft booth at the CES show in Vegas as I was always looking for a cool computer for my daughter.
I think it's a great concept and an even better turnaround story. The company was bought by a team of investors in early 2004 and brought in new and experienced managers to develop the hip-e computer. They started shipping the computer in December and the improved sales and profit markets should start showing in their next quarterly report which should be released in Feb 05. The current m/c is only about $12 Mio which I think is ridiculously low. When I first saw their computer I thought their m/c would be around $ 200-300 Mio.
Check out the press releases of the last 6 months. News about customers canceling orders, directors quitting their jobs, super low profit margins and of course a very competitive environment make you understand why investors just gave up and the stock is as such depressed levels:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/h?s=DLFG.OB
I think the risk to the downside is very low but the stock could turn into an amazing turnaround story.
Thoughts?
I think George's point was that there are different networks out there which each need different solutions. But he showed no sign of worry that this could not be solved - he only indicated that it might take some more time.
After all they successfully made trials with the mock-up computer phone on the T-Mobile network.
If it would be easy evrybody would have it by now.
I talked to George today and he said they are hoping to get the prototypes by the end of this year. They are still experiencing difficulties to make the different networks speak to each other. Telling from his tone I would not be surprised if we would see further delays.
Interesting artikel in the WSJ (free today):
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109995877200568271,00.html?mod=yahoo_hs&ru=yahoo
Race to Link Wi-Fi, Cellphones Picks Up Speed
By GINNY PARKER
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
August 12, 2004; Page B4
TOKYO – Imagine walking to work while talking on your cellphone. Out on the street, you're using a cellular network and paying your mobile provider for each minute you gab. But once you reach the office, your cellphone detects a signal from your company's wireless Internet, or Wi-Fi, transmitter and automatically switches you from the cellular network to the Wi-Fi one. Your call is now being routed over the Internet, saving money on cellphone fees. You're also able to browse the Web on your cellphone at superfast broadband speeds.
Such technology -- under development in Japan and elsewhere -- stands to revolutionize telecommunications on two levels. For the consumer, the technology combines the convenience of cellular access with the low cost and high speeds of Wi-Fi, all in a single device. For the industry as a whole, this technology illustrates a new but increasingly common theme: how the convergence of once-discrete technologies -- in this case, mobile-phone service and the Internet – is pitting unlikely rivals against each other in a battle for chunks of a brand-new territory.
Japan serves as a prime example. Here, two companies have just announced handsets that function on cellular and wireless networks. One is made by NEC Corp. and will be marketed by NTT DoCoMo Inc., Japan's largest cellular provider. The other device is from Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd., a unit of computer-maker Fujitsu Ltd., which has long cooperated with DoCoMo by making handsets for the carriers' exclusive use. This time, however, Fujitsu, in a joint-project with telecommunications equipment-maker Net-2Com Corp., is striking out on its own.
Of course, Japanese companies aren't the only ones developing such devices. Other companies, including Motorola Inc., Schaumburg, Ill., and Hewlett-Packard Co., Palo Alto, Calif., have unveiled phones that combine cellular and Wi-Fi technology.
But the race to develop this new type of phone stands to be particularly heated in Japan, a country where cellular technology is more advanced than almost anywhere else. Nearly 70% of the population use cellphones, many of them packed with fancy features like TV tuners and video-conferencing capabilities.
Moreover, amid intense rivalry, cellphone operators are struggling to find new markets and ways to distinguish themselves. Devices like Fujitsu's and DoCoMo's -- designed specifically for corporate use -- are seen as the next big thing.
Both Fujitsu and DoCoMo's handsets are examples of a new breed of communication devices that merge PDA-like functions with cellphones. Nobutsugu Fujino, a senior researcher at Fujitsu, calls his company's product an "all-purpose remote control for the office." In addition to being able to make phone calls, the bar-shaped handset has a screen for Web browsing, e-mailing and looking at documents stored on a company's server.
Fujitsu's phone can function on wireless networks -- both office Wi-Fi systems and public, wireless, Internet-access points called hotspots. When the phone isn't within range of a Wi-Fi transmitter, a networking card inserted into the top of the phone allows it to function on cellular networks. The changeover from one network to another takes place without disruption of the service, using Fujitsu software called Seamlesslink, says Mr. Fujino. A price hasn't been set for the handset, which will be available this fall.
The handset runs on a Windows CE operating system from Microsoft Corp., and users can customize the device by loading it with different types of software. That's a stark contrast to the way cellphones typically work, locking users into the software provided by the carrier.
As demonstrated at a Fujitsu technology show last month, some of the proposed uses for the device seem almost futuristic.
For instance, the phone can be equipped with a card that can store personal identification data, with sensors installed around the office communicating with the device and determining the employees' location.
Calls that come in to the employees' work phone number are routed right to the employee, no matter where he or she is. And when an employee sits down at a workstation -- any workstation -- that person's personal computer desktop is automatically called up onto the computer monitor. In the conference room, users can use the phone to display documents on television screen for others to see.
As a potential competitor, NTT DoCoMo's N900iL, unveiled last month, is a phone that works over wireless office networks and DoCoMo's high-speed, third-generation, or 3G, cellular network.
Hitoshi Yasuda, who directs product development for corporate users at DoCoMo, calls The handset an "information terminal" that will work as a cellphone while also functioning like a PDA, allowing users to check office e-mail, schedules and documents saved on the company server. Each handset will cost around ¥40,000 (about $360) to ¥50,000 and will be available in the fall.
Mr. Yasuda says he isn't worried that the ability to make mobile calls over the Internet might eat into DoCoMo's core cellular services, since Japan doesn't yet have a proliferation of Wi-Fi hotspots. It's more important, he says, to bring new corporate users onto DoCoMo's networks.
Doe: George told me that they are in talks with RIMM. But I guess it wouldn't hurt to get confirmation directly from the customer.
As far as execution is concerned I think they made a step in the right decision by outsourcing production to Flextronics. At least that's what they stated in their last filing. I always saw their own in house manufacturing as their weak spot.
I read that story in the WSJ. What I liked about it is that it makes VOIP very attractive which could be an incentive for people to get high speed internet and eventually Wi-Fi.
"VOIP service also is appealing to Comcast because the technology enables the introduction of features out of the reach of regular phone companies. Future offerings may include videophones, video e-mail, and integrating phone messages and e-mails on a Web page that can be retrieved from any computer with an Internet connection."
Comcast has more than 21 million cable-TV subscribers.
CALYPSO WIRELESS will participate in the Wi-Fi Planet Conference from June 9th - 10th in Baltimore, MD. at booth # 522.
We will attend the show to talk to Calypso and check out their phones and technology.
Let me know if you want me to ask any specific questions.
http://www.jupiterevents.com/wifi/spring04/
bbaazzuurraahh, I N V S T, plaintif2000, charlesfinney_99: check your mail box
According to the city of Enicinitas zonig it looks like the buliding is in a residential area (Residential Rural 1).
Information on zoning in Encinitas is available at
http://ci.encinitas.ca.us
Any thoughts how can they will be able to set up such a big business in a residential area?
nlightn: Why do you waste your time on this board? If you don't believe in this company and ar not holding stock why don't you just move on and leave us alone. What is your point?
tainor: Thanks for the information. If Birdstep’s switching technology is based on the fastest available net and then automatically connects to it, it will not infringe on Calypso’s patent. This is also the official stance of Calypso.
This technology might work great for data but might not be sufficient for voice:
A Wi-Fi switching cell phone based on Birdstep’s technology would automatically establish a connection to the Wi-Fi network as long as it is faster than the cell network. We all are familiar with what a cordless phone sounds like when you are too far away from the base station. Birdsteps’s technology would initiate the switching process at any distance even if this speed is not sufficient for voice yet. This might result in static and scratching noises which you are trying to avoid in a phone call. That’s where Calypso’s technology comes in: It patented claim is that it only establishes the connection once you within a certain distance (predetermined parameter) of the base station. That way you make sure that the quality of service is sufficient for voice.
That’s where investors see the value in Calypso’s patent.
Q. E. D.
tainaor: You seem to have good knnowledge of Birdstep's technologie. Do you know what triggers the switching from a WAN network to Wi-Fi? Does it switch the moment it establishes a connection to the Wi-Fi network or does this depend on other parameters?
Michael: I didn’t know that there is a difference between the up and download speed in Wi-Fi networks. I never noticed a difference in my home network. But I did notice a huge difference when I switched from dial-up to high speed cable (plus Wi-Fi). EV-DO’s upload speed of 40-60 kbps doesn’t seem to be much faster than my old 54 kbps dial-up connection, which was painfully slow.
At least for me Wi-Fi is free: My high speed internet connection costs me about $8 more than AOL plus a second phone line but I did not switch because of Wi-Fi. Wi-Fi was just an added bonus and free (except the $50 for the router) and allows several people to be online simultaneously. Since I do most of my internet surfing at home or the office this set-up is absolutely sufficient and I do not need to spend another $80 for a medium fast connection on top of that.
My point is that Calypso’s technology might be a major competition for EV-DO as a lot of households already have high speed internet and might feel the same way than me.
But I did sign up for T-Mobile’s Wi-Fi service in case I have to travel, but I share it with 3 of my employees so the effective cost is only $5 per month per person.
Also, I forgot to tell you that a few days ago AT&T signed another Wi-Fi roaming agreement. We’re not there yet but are going in the right direction.
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040419/cgm007_1.html
Out for the day.
QED
nlightn: What makes you feel that I think that large the network carriers reference themselves to message boards for direction?
I know from phone and email correspondence with the company that they are in talks with Nokia and RIM/Blackberry.
Sugarpea: The second part of your post regarding competition is a "safe haven statement" which you will probably find in many filings. If statements like these impact your investment decisions on you will be left with very few investments options.
Also, the company states that "Based on this patented technology and our knowledge of wireless products and technology, we believe that there are currently no other companies that offer this type of solution."
Well, we didn't find any company either.
Q. E. D.
Sugarpea: I disagree with our statement that “that they aren't quite up-to-date on this information”. This is out off context as they also state “Our technology is not dependant on the improved cellular 3G technologies but will complement and improve the performance of these as they become available.”
And if you read my post #504 or Walter Mossberg’s article in the Wall Street Journal of 4-8-04 you should be aware of the major disadvantages of EV-DO: painful slow upload speeds of just 40-60 kbps, high monthly fees of $80 and maximum speeds could drop as more people use the network. Disadvantages Calypso’s technology does not have.
Q. E. D.
nlightn: What do you expect from a development stage company? I wrote in my post #440 of 3-28-04 that I would not be surprised if we’d see many more delays as shipments of new developments are always late.
Once Calypso will announce agreements with handset manufacturer such as Nokia and RIM/Blackberry nobody will care if the 10K filing was a few days late or the production was delayed. The credibility will not suffer from that and the technology is still there. These announcements might take many more months though and it will be a matter of patience.
I strongly recommend you to read my post 440 again. You might agree that production is the weakest part of their business plan but they have much more going for them such as helping to get handset manufacturer get out Wi-Fi phones to market fast:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2708946
Q. E. D.
I N V S T:
What happend to your post from 1:50 pm today? I guess you were right.
Q. E. D.
I wished the stock would have tanked today. This would have sent a strong message to company management that investors expecting them to file documents in a timely manner and we are not willing to tolerate actions like this.
I totally agree. Working prototypes are key. If they fail CLYW will be finished.
If they will work the outlook will be very bright as it will enable handset manufacturers to bring Wi-Fi switching phones and PDAs to market fast and beat their competitors.
Sugarpea: Do you think the patent might have value to a company such as Cisco, Intel or Microsoft that would have the funds to defend and enforce it?
Michael: I noticed that you keep questioning the secrecy issue. You have to differentiate if you market to consumers or businesses. Businesses make more informed decisions while consumers act spontaneous and often want to be first to get the latest product.
I run my business which is the worldwide leader in a niche market of consumer products. One of our biggest problems is to keep new product developments secret. The problem is the moment consumers find out about a new product they stop buying the existing products and wait for the new ones to come out. This not only hurts our sales but also sales at our retailers.
The other problem is that if you release the information too early it will be OLD news by the time the product comes out. Any product that comes out in between that period will be NEW news and kill your “new” product.
We learned the hard way when we introduced a product about 6 months prior to the shipping date. We initially created a huge demand and hype but this was almost gone by the time we were actually able to ship.
I noticed the same happened to Palm about 2 or 3 years ago. Sales dropped 25 % in a quarter when they leaked information about a new handheld 3 months prior to the shipping date. Consumers stopped buying the existing products and waited for the new model.
We not only learned from that experience but refined our marketing strategy which I noticed Nokia is using on the local level as well: About 2-3 weeks before we ship new models to stores we send out samples to selected opinion leaders, magazines and influential web sites. The recipients are exited to be able to get the latest and hottest product before anybody else and communicate their excitement to others. It’s the same as if you would be able to get the latest Mercedes 3 weeks before it will be available in stores. How would you feel about this? The most likely outcome is that you will praise it like it is the best car ever built. This word-of-mouth marketing strategy is so powerful that we hardly need any other marketing tools to promote our products. Of course this marketing strategy only works best if this is timed with the immediate availability of the products.
Our competitors still believe they should release the information about new products as soon it is off the drawing board to give the consumers more time to make a decision or save up money. They are probably wondering how come none of their products is creating hype and why their market share is declining.
As you see people have different opinions everywhere, but some are more successful than others.
Q. E. D.
Sugarpee: I followed your links and saw a lot of talk but not much walk. None of the companies you mentioned seem to have prototypes or final products. Calypso will have working prototypes ready in a few weeks. How can you say that Calypso is behind the industry?
Calypso can offer handset manufacturers products and/or solutions which will enable them to bring any product to market fast. That’s what matters in this highly competitive industry. Nokia’s stock dropped 19% last week as their revenues fell 2% over the previous quarter. Analysts blamed this on the failure to come out with the latest clamshell and color screen phones fast enough. I would be surprised if Nokia will make that mistake again.
If you really want to find out where Calypso’s stand is compared to the technology of its competitors you have to do more DD than posting links to anything that shows up on a “seamless network switching” search on Google. What matters is if companies are actually disconnecting networks and what methods they are using.
I looked into Birdstep’s and Ipunplugged’s methods. Their primary goal seems to be that “the connection and the existing communication must be kept up and running”. (http://www.ipunplugged.com/technology.asp?mi=3.1
This is contrary to Calypso’s goal of providing savings for the carrier and the end consumer. The only thing I found on their web sites about what might cause a network switching is: “Just unplug your laptop and Mobile IP will ensure that communication is continued on the available Wireless LAN”.
I don’t consider this technology exactly a steep uphill battle for Calypso.
Q. E. D.
Sugarpea: As you might remember I explained in my post #390 that Calypso’s patent is only one of may be many methods for seamless network switching. As long as other companies use different methods to enable the switching process or run both networks simultaneously they will not have to pay royalties to Calypso.
Calypso might have to compete with them but Calypso’s technology has a significant advantage:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2678966
Sugarpea: In order to assess a possible threat to Calypso’s patents and business model it would be helpful to know what kind of methods the other companies are using for their seamless network switching. For instance, Ericsson’s technology establishes a connection to a local area network through authentication of the base station, Calyspo’s switching to a LAN is triggered when the phone device gets within a certain, pre-determined distance of the LAN base station.
Do you know what methods these other companies are using?
Also you mentioned it seems that Calypso is behind in the industry, can you name companies or products that actually have existing phones or prototypes that incorporate seamless network switching?
The more people hear about Wi-Fi phones and their advantages the better they will understand Calypso's value when they hear about it in future news.
Wif-Fi and Wi-fi switching phones are hot. Here is a link to an article which was published in Forbes Magazine:
http://biz.yahoo.com/fo/040408/51092c44522cff06f6c3ab287d579b55_1.html
I don't expect any announcement about sales deals until 5-6 weeks after they ship prototypes which are supposed to go out in mid May. However, if the involved companies choose to keep the deal secret we won't hear anything until another 4-5 months until just before the phones are ready for shipment.
PRs about licensing agreements might take even longer.
What's more predictable and will drive the stock price just as much is coverage on TV which is supposed to air end of April. You might find out on CLYW's web site or even on CNBC's site:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/Content/CNBCTV/TV_Info/highlights.asp
Walter S. Mossberg’s test report of Verizon's new EV-DO service in today’s Wall Street Journal:
He thinks it is terrific and highly recommends it for mobile Internet users. The downsides, however, are upload speeds of just 40-60 kbps, high monthly fees of $80 and maximum speeds could drop as more people use the network.
KrisCo: I fully agree with your view: Big move due to TV coverage and AMEX, but no announcements/feedback from field trials as the super competitive wireless industry does not allow handset manufacturers to leak any information about new developements until just before they are ready to ship product.
Nokia's numbers release from yesterday were evidence for the competitiveness but at the same time highlighted the need and urgency for manufacturers to come out with new and innovative products. Why would any manufacturer not want to jump on CLYW?
I found this on another board ...
http://www.ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CLYW&read=730
Why we may not be getting off the pinks.....
I own shares in another pink sheet company called GMED and below is a response from the President today as to the delay in getting off the pinks:
When will GenoMed move off the Pink Sheets and onto the OTC BB?
The first thing the company did when we got funding in November, 2001 was to prepare to move onto the OTC BB. It was supposed to be a 2 month exercise. Unfortunately, the Enron scandal and others occurred then, to which the SEC responded by tightening up its accounting rules. The rules for reporting stock options changed two or three times before the summer of 2002. Each time they changed, we had to submit revisions to our Form 10-SB.
We officially became eligible for the OTC BB on November 7, 2002. We subsequently went through three market makers, since NASD sent back questions which the first two MM's didn't want to waste their time with. The third MM helped us with the NASD, even going so far as to make a personal pitch for why we were doing valuable work. This was above and beyond the call of duty, since MM's can't be paid for this service. The NASD, like many people looking at our company, had a hard time understanding how such a small company could own such important intellectual property. In other words, they did not understand how science works.
After our last reply to the NASD in the spring of 2003, we haven't heard a word from them. In August, an article came out in a financial journal saying that the OTC BB was being eliminated, that it was being allowed to die by attrition. Anecdotal evidence suggests that this is true: two years ago, I'm told, 2-3 companies were being approved every day for the OTC BB, but very few new companies have been admitted to the OTC BB for the past year or so. The NASD, my source told me, no longer wants to be in the business of vouching for penny stocks. Another predictable response, I suppose, to the recent Wall Street scandals.
Our experience at GenoMed has been entirely consistent with this version of reality, which is why I present it. If the NASD wanted to be as transparent as companies are now supposed to be, you would think that the NASD might tell new companies like mine and investors that the OTC BB was now defunct. In particular, it will be hard for companies like GenoMed to attract institutional investors when they all keep thinking the OTC BB is still accepting new companies as in the old days. Their rules don't allow them to invest in Pink Sheet stocks.
In our own case, we no longer expect to hear from NASD about the OTC BB. Instead, we plan to remain on the Pink Sheets until our share price qualifies us for an exchange like the AMEX. Since our business is to improve the public's health, getting the word out to the average investor will benefit both our public health mission and our price per share. In this respect, it doesn't really matter that institutional investors won't invest in us because they still think the OTC BB is alive. Institutional investors will just be missing out on the early phase of company growth, when stock prices can go up by orders of magnitude instead of just a few percent.
All I can say is, thank God there's more than one exchange in this world. Thank God for competition!
But I digress. I hope this answers your question, which many people have also asked.
Yours sincerely,
Dave Moskowitz MD
CEO, GenoMed, Inc.
Wi-Fi & more Wi-Fi ...
Much has been made of Wi-Fi recently. First of all, many more people are inddterested in having wireless connectivity with their laptops -- after all, if you don't have it, then what's the point of portability in the first place? These days, most of us use our computers as connected communication tools above all. And Gartner Group forecasts Wi-Fi users at 30 million in 2004, a far cry from the 9.3 million users last year.
USA Today included an enthusiastic feature on Wi-Fi's future recently, predicting that soon, wireless connectivity will be everywhere ...
http://biz.yahoo.com/fool/040330/1080673500_1.html
and
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040330/tech_wifi_baseball_1.html
Michael:
I forgot another important application for Calypso's technology: video camera phones. A lot of people are talking about them lately but the only downside they say is the painfully slow upload speed over traditional networks. CLYW would solve this problem. You could record it and send it once you enter a Wi-Fi network.
Roaming:
A few weeks ago the WSJ reported the first Wi-Fi roaming agreement between T-Mobile and I think it was ATT. They took this as a sign that there might be a lot more roaming agreements to come similar to what happened in the cell phone industry.
I think my evaluation of the patent value in my post #440 was too conservative. I based it on Wi-Fi capable phone obtaining a market share of 10%. Yesterday I read in the WSJ that 16 % of all cell phones sold in 03 were camera phones (84 mio up from 18 mio). So there should be no reason why Wi-Fi phones should not reach the same market penetration. So you can add another 60% plus the potential revenue from camera phones and my estimate of the value of the patent is probably closer to $3B.
The paper also stated this young but fast-growing market is the first big test of whether Nokia can sustain its huge lead in the wider handset market as mobile phones become multipurpose devices capable of taking pictures, playing games and accessing the Web. This tells me that they are pressured to come out with new innovations and Wi-Fi or video phones could be among them. Actually George Schilling mentioned in a phone call with a friend of mine that they are talking to Nokia.
George also mentioned in a recent email that they are in touch with RIM although he wasn’t specific about the time frame.
Regarding the VoiceTech agreement Calypso will only have to share revenues from the VOIP portion and only if the licensee uses their VOIP solution, but there are many other options. Also see my post #367
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2662774
Q. E. D.
Michael: I’m glad you brought up your questions and this explains your reservations. I would also not go big on anything I’m not 100 % convinced of. The best way to find out is to try out the technology yourself. It looks like you are not using Wi-Fi or VOIP telephony at home. Get it right now, it’s cheap easy to install and might make you a lot of money: I’m using 8x8.com’s (NASD: EGHT) packet 8 internet phone adapter. All you have to do is plug it in between your high speed internet modem and your phone and sign up for their service. The phone works great 90-95% of the time, it sometimes gets a little bit static though. For $20 per month you get unlimited local and long distance calling within the US and incoming phone calls will even follow you if you plug in the adapter at a hotel room.
Wi-Fi is the greatest thing since sliced bread. You can connect to the internet anywhere in the house, on the couch, the patio and in your bedroom. It is super fast and several users can be online at the same time. Wi-Fi is unstoppable, routers are extremely cheap, easy to install and most laptops come with pre-installed modems. Bests of all, once you’ve invested those $50 for the router it’s free.
Calypso’s technology basically allows you do make VOIP phone calls through a Wi-Fi network. Additional benefits are the fast download speed which allows you to download bandwidth rich content including streaming video.
The following is a link to a good article about Wi-Fi phones:
http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/28/cx_ah_0428tentech.html
Still not convinced? Check out this article. It seems like the whole world is working on Wi-Fi switching phones:
http://telephonyonline.com/ar/telecom_seamless_mobility_ultimate/
Get the items above and you will be convinced.
The following are my answers to your concerns:
1. Revolutionary/breakthrough technology:
Many experts considered seamless switching from cell to Wi-Fi impossible. If you read the articles in the links above you will realize how many companies are working on this. CLYW made seamless switching possible and that's why it is legit to call it a breakthrough.
Another very important point is that most WAN including Wi-Max work best outdoors or in an unobstructed environment and have limitations in buildings. When I get calls on my Blackberry cell phone at home I have to step outside to get better reception. Where do you do most of your internet surfing? If the answer is indoors you'd be better served with a combined Wi-Fi/cell device than cell or Wi-Max only.
I personally would buy a device with Calypso’s technology in a heartbeat:
I’m a heavy Blackberry user. It’s always online, works as a cell phone and I use it for 80 % of my stock research including this message board, stock quotes and about 40 % of my email. The only disadvantage is that it’s painfully slow, the cell phone service is expensive and doesn’t work well indoors. A Calypso powered, Wi-Fi compatible Blackberry phone would solve all these problems. I also just signed up for T-Mobile’s Wi-Fi plan for $20 a month (for existing customers) for unlimited internet access within the US which would also cover all Wi-Fi phone calls made in within their hotspots.
Down the road you will be able to watch streaming video while at an airport, in a hotel lobby or at your local Starbucks. IMO Wi-Fi phones make more sense than camera cell phones, which are a big revenue generator for handset manufacturers. People see cell phone as status symbols these days and are willing to spend a lot of money just to be first. I think Calypso is ahead of the game in Wi-Fi switching phones and I’m not aware of any other company that has them or is as far advanced as Calypso. Correct me if I’m wrong and let me know of what companies you are aware of that are working on network switching Wi-Fi phones.
2. $500 Mio Deal with China Telecom:
I only saw articles in the media but never the original press release. So I can’t tell from what sources they got their information from but I admit that the articles are upbeat. However, the article I found of Nov. 29, 03 states that China Telecom PLANS a combined phone/WiFi mobile network with Calypso – I take “plan” as not signed yet.
http://www.newswireless.net/articles/031129-calypso.html
Calypso's stand is that the ball is in their court to supply China Telecom with 30-35 proto-type phones.
http://www.ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CLYW&read=1219
I think someone here on this board gave a good explanation about the nature of the deal. I do believe that they might have signed something, especially since I learned from other sources that China Telecom is planning the roll out of a Wi-Fi network. We’ll know more in a few months.
3. Execution:
From my own experience of manufacturing technical products I know that shipments of new developments are always late. Honestly I would not be surprised if we’d see many more delays. But you brought up a valid point and that is one of the reservations I have too. I think making phones in their own factory in Nicaragua is a mistake. I’d rather see them using an experienced OEM manufacturer such as Flextronics or Solectron. I would not bet my house on the manufacturing part of their business.
That’s why I was very pleased to hear that they added licensing of their technology to their business model. Since they have working mock ups and soon prototypes they can offer licensees solutions and know how to get their products faster to market. This comes close to a Qualcomm style business model.
4. Multiple PRs:
There were differences in the PRs like they covered different industries and customer groups. But I agree, the primary goal of the repeated announcements was to boost the stock price. On the other hand I don’t think there’s anything wrong with this, at least they got their name out, boosted the stock price and will meet the listing requirements with AMEX. This will make it easier for them to attract well connected personalities from Wall Street or the telecom industry which I think is crucial for a fast and successful execution. It will also be easier to raise additional money in private placements and at least they will get more money for their shares.
You also want to be invested in a company that has good communication skills. What good does it do if a company does great things but doesn't talk about it?
5. Feedback at Trade Shows:
I wouldn’t be worried about his. I’m sure the meetings took place behind closed doors and the involved companies have a strong desire to keep their product developments secret. I’m sure we’ll see plenty coverage once media representative will be able to see and test actual phones.
IMO any suspicion of fraud is far fetched. It is very unlikely that someone would go through all this including obtaining a patent just to boost the stock price. Why would you? The patent and it’s underlying technology can be worth billions. If any of the PRs regarding the field tests would have been fabricated the involved companies such as China Telecom, Enitel or T-Mobile would have had publicly protested by now.
For me the patent and the potential business from licensing are Calypso’s biggest asset.
The patent is our safety net. It is awarded, has value and the failure of the Metrix report to do any damage made it only stronger.
I evaluate the value of the patent on what it would be worth for companies such as Cisco, Intel or even Microsoft. I’m comfortable with a market value of $1.4B ($155B industry (source WSJ), 10% of phones using the technology, 3% royalty, evaluation: 3 times of annual IP revenues).
IP licensing business: Calypso seems to be ahead of the industry in the development of seamless Wi-Fi network switching and they have a working mock up phone available and prototypes coming in. I see this as their biggest advantage to win OEM licensees for their technology. Their sales team seems to work hard, they do the right things to create relationships and I’m positive that we will see results soon.
I hope that helped.
What is your and everybody else’s take on the value of the patent?
q. e. d.