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.
I find as a shareholder comfort when WSGI's acronyms become embedded in government public documents.
I'd say the length of the specific language mentioned in the full time permanent position noted referencing BIB, would indicate a commitment to its continued use based upon their initial testing. Besides, they could have easily not even mentioned it by name in the blurb to get the person desired. How many folks have direct experience in the BIB's operation?
It remains to be seen if this translates into more orders, but it is a very positive sign.
m
Yes in the french derivation of meanings one of them is in the realm of "idiotic".
And, as it should be no surprise IJO, I agree with your genesis of BIB.
m
Got ahead of myself and misread profit improvement as just GTC.
m
This summation leads me to believe the 10Q due Aug 15 can be expected to be a pleasant surprise.
The biggie is the improvement noted in GTC profitability...huge change...must be due to more simplex accounts coming onboard. Can be no other reason I can think of. Looks like David is finally starting to click.
I believe all his shares granted at acquisition are now unencumbered and now free to trade.
m
One best hope not if I were a director that what you opine is true.
It is maleficence in the nth degree regarding fiduciary responsibility to allow one's shareholders to be knowingly over diluted.
m
What a fine and detailed filing it is indeed.
The only line in all of it that makes me go hmmmm is this..
" La Jolla has a bad reputation for doing the same things to other companies that it did to WSGI as alleged above."
Did they not know this in their DD?
m
Not the comptroller. call company.
m
Looks like Dian G is working out for WSGI. PR is up since their engagement.
m
Indy..I'm of the opinion that the Yuma and Nevada tests of the Argus did yield we shareholders one key piece of information.
The military thought enough of our abilities displayed there to say something like this..
' This is really terrific but it is more than we need right now.
If you could take this and make it into a viable package deployable, recoverable and recyclable by one or two men and be field transportable and be effective in IED detection and field comm., we'd be very interested.'
Thus the BIB was born and sold.
I'm convinced that without a solid confidence in the Argus tests in the months the military had it, there would be no confidence in wanting to continue a relationship with WSGI.
JMO
m
You would think with David's expertise in asset tracking an automatic provision of a SPOT chip woven (or similar) into the balloon fabric of every BIB would be a standard SOP of manufacture.
Perhaps it was and it is as simple as someone failed to "turn it on."
As I understand, the unit was delivered as specified, training provided, turned over to the customer (DOD) and paid for.
To determine if this incident has any negative downside for the company long term, we should not have to wait long to find out.
No new orders....problem.
New orders....no problem.
As an aside...the company filed a patent for an aerostat specifically requested as a result of testing out of the Argus in the Nevada Proving Grounds, which incorporates, interestingly enough, a tethered aerostat/release free-flight powered and recovery system.
Will this incident open the door for a window of opportunity for the introduction of this design remains an interesting possibility.
m
Excellent synopsis of the reality of the current situation and the followon to Indyblue.
Appreciated,
m
Neo...the request to increase authorized and a reverse are independent events.
If the reason for increase is as implied, for continued acquistion of asset entities synergistic with the WSGI mission statement, then a reverse would not change the ability one iota to provide the needed cushion of shares for value necessary for those acquisitions.
I do believe there are now a significant majority number of common shareholders with 100's K to millions of shares each that would not feel the impact of a reverse if and when authorized and probably vote for it on merits presented.
What would happen is the large numbers of shareholders with smaller lots would be effectively eliminated in a reverse significantly reducing the total shareholder count. They likely would also be the first approached and most likely to agree to a company initiated share buy back program.
As long as you have an anti-champion actively motivated to keep the price down to encourage a reverse the odds of having one occur increase.
It is imperative to remove LJ ASAP to mitigate the need for or at least reduce the size of a reverse if needed.
It seems the increase in AS is actually absolutely prudent and necessary.
JMO
m
It will be interesting to see, if as part of the purchase assets of LTAS, any patent intellectual property was acquired.
Anyone care to do a search for Hess patent filings?
m
In reviewing the last 3 quarterlies I was interested in the language used to describe the patents for the BIB and I believe it is clear the ongoing relationship with LTAS (and others) has had an influence..
First mentioned in August 14 Q 2 release...
"..in August 2012, we filed a provisional patent application on our “Blimp in a Box™ ”
Q 3 released Nov. 20, 2012..
all mention of BIB patents mentioned in Q 2 conspicuously absent.
Year end K filed Mar 29, 2013..
"We have also filed provisional patents in August 2012 for the apparatus and method for transporting and deploying an aerostat,"
And this new language never used previously in the section on all intellectual property...
"In certain cases, when appropriate, we opt to protect our intellectual property through trade secrets as opposed to filing for patent protection in order to preserve confidentiality."
m
IJO..um...I asked about an 8k not a PR. But Warp gave an opinion I happen to embrace and costs nothing and pays dividends with shareholders that a blog via others opinion doesn't. And I don't mean any disrespect or doubt as to you believeing them to have been delivered.
I'd just prefer the company take a second to let us know contract one is squared away, in whatever appropriate fashion they feel they can, whether or not another contract is coming.
Thanks,
m
Ok. So based on your intel certainty and if invoiced obligation is created for $605k would you expect an 8k?
m
IJO...<They found the money to deliver two BiB's this month.>
Did I miss a PR? When did this happen?
m
As an outside observer to this topic of discussion the pleasing takeaway is that all participants must feel WSGI will be a major viable player in the sector.
m
I believe the necessary "obligation" listing requirements are not met to be listed until a product is delivered and invoiced...and to our knowledge and lack of 8k that has not as yet likely happened.
With that in mind it should not have been listed in the first place and the error has been corrected.
m
IJO...I can't think of a single person who has met Glenn personally and chatted with him, including all those who have attended SHM's like myself, who haven't thought highly of Glenn.
All negative spoken or typed comments here have come from those who haven't or hearsay.
m
I am not sure how material events work regarding 8 k's...but I do know BJ does.
If they haven't received any money as yet or it is from date of announcement publicly, perhaps that is reason..I don't know. Maybe this doesn't qualify at all, strange as that would seem.
I don't query her about this stuff anymore as I know her competence filing level is sound.
The fact there is not one as yet does not mean the contract doesn't exist.
m
Perhaps there is a marriage of convenience with Aerial Solutions at work here.
Our patentable guts on their shell and our contracting ability with DOD.
win win...we know trailer, winch, cable and generator are not patentable nor unique.
I never thought for a moment the ribbed box in Las Vegas was unique.
Hey, as IJO points out, who got the DOD sale?
Coastie should retire.
m
I wholeheartedly agree with you that management having options versus grants is more in alignment with a commoner's interest than outright grants and applaud this team for doing so.
I believe the timing is interesting of the "conversion" and may have more to do with developments now apparent than a past remorse, and making certain while still under the auspice "eye" of SEC oversight wanted to avoid any any any chance of impropriety.
Regarding Mike Clark. His whole 2012 stock grants were tied to very specific goal objectives and thresholds of achievement and were not just gimmes. One must remember he was not managment but COB and as such, like Tony to follow, was granted outright on appointment 5 mm shares. I trust any further grants to Tony would likewise be tied to performance objectives ala Clark. In addition, Clark also was granted performance options at significantly higher prices than current.
The management "conversion" happened 6 months after Clark's departure and 2 months after the unveiling of the BIB and patent filings and in the midst now apparent of heavy "end" run negotiations for contract securement for it; just allowing to back track a reasonably impressive and aggresive timeline based upon shared procurement procedures for DoD mentioned by others here. It also occured right at the time of the expiry period of the 2 year mandatory SEC oversight period.
BJ is a smart cookie and I suspect she may have been more of an influence in guarding against any perceived problem even at an increased personal cost to all concerned. There is also only one additional obvious reason for being so "generous" and that is an overwhelming confidence that the share price would be higher than the strike price increase sooner than later.
regards,
m
Congratulations management .
What I was pleased about in today's announcement, once again, was what was missing.
This was not announced as a one time fixed contract as many others posted here typically include as language. Therefore, rightly or wrongly, I view this as our initial blanket widget number listing for BiB special order access for any DOD division to order within their budget constraints and at anytime.
This was true for me in a prior life experience with VA contracts. Took forever to get listed and first small order, then boom within a year was in every facility with years of residuals.
Also pleased the "prime" is our own GTC ! Huge as it yields a direct contact channel to end user and cuts out vig having to be paid to middle man.
Huge!
bravo
M
My sense from fact Ijo had to sign an NDA to have a tuna sandwich with Glenn is a clue.
And..btw...once you sign one of those puppies your trading is restricted depending on conversation.
Apparently most everything Glenn can share can't at the moment be in public domain...so must be guarded.
I do know for a fact other shareholders have had go do same.
Frustrating but I also view it as encouraging and IJO has been generous with the boundries of the spirit of the agreement without transgression.
I am grateful he did so to solidly ground his support.
M
Indy..I have always thought from the 2011 SHM where they really touted the 100% profitablity of the ESN accounts on those appliques, as the potential razor blade annuity revenue stream to match Mike's claim that the company could well survive handsomely on just GTC revenues alone...without airships!
IF these ancient appliques we acquired are indeed a viable asset, what's it take to "turn on" the asset to initiate that 100% profitable perpetual income stream into 2025?
You mention scalability of production (I assume) of the widget gadgets the account holder needs.
Other thoughts:
*An inside sales manager (ISM) on payroll (plus commission incentives).
*A bunch of highly incentivized outside contract reps, paid like insurance reps and with scaled goal oriented commissions (plenty of juicy room in 100% to do that).
*Can any accounts be turned on without we providing the equipment?
*How about severely discounted if not free equipment with lock-in long term contracts..ala cell phones?
*Why can't David start this now as the inital ISM until money stream and market performers generate a viable replacement?
Of course, airship contracts may provide the "grease" to start this engine, but how capital intensive is it really?
All of this assumes that the asset is viable.
*Who is the customer?
Just random thoughts...
m
Yes sir, and I am pleased to have you as a champion of GTC and help ferret out this acquisition advantage.
I think it is not unfair to say that the company has been lax in keeping us well informed of the merits now and potentially for GTC. It has been more than obtuse about it.
BTW...why only 3000 ECN's currently? I don't know why I thought with 8 appliques and there were 10K free ECNs on each. If this was already answered in the excellent exchange of discourse here with Rattle..forgive me. In addition, did GE elaborate more on Mike's vision of the dynamic integration of the appliques and the airship platforms?
Grateful
m
IJ...happen to agree with your take on Glenn's personna and Ren's on BJ's having the pleasure of meeting both as well. ( don't quite get the sunglasses comment though).
Now what I am interested in is I know this was on your mind ever since I brought it forward a while back so..
<GTC-USA has all the GlobalStar simplex appliques and free ESN's that go with them>
Where are they and why are they not generating revenue, when will they and what will it take to do it?
Just want to know where our 2.7 mm dollar asset is and was it worth the price paid?
I trust you didn't leave this stone unturned..
Best regards,
m
Indy....I completely forgot about this language in that report...
< GTC has recently entered into an LOI
to been acquired by WSGI and is to be
integrated as a wholly owned subsidiary. It
is believed to be able to provide an ongoing
revenue stream and specialized customer
base to aid in the pursuit of government and
DoD contract opportunities for ARGUS ONE.>
It would certainly make sense for the BiB as well.
m
Regarding the PR...I have always paid attention to the selection of the words BJ allows to go through these releases and I was struck in her use of the words.."our defense partner" , not once but twice.
What's the big deal you ask? Well what's interesting is they did not use that term to describe the hook up with EWA and CPT.
So I am inclined to believe it is another not yet known "defense partner" and the word usage leads me to believe the process of contract work is very mature and whoever that is will be the "Prime".
m
Yes correct and the Africa one was approxiately Nigeria. From Mike's Colorado slides he makes a big deal about the cross Africa continent comm. link possible utilizing Strats in combo with this ground station's locale to cover essentially the broad swath of coast to coast of the Central African continent.
Sky towers.
m
Ren...thank you for pointing these out.
I am cautiously optimistic, but I see with this adaption of another's system, while perhaps a synergy of strength as Indy opines, I am troubled that a dilution of IP is occuring.
< I dont think the removal of the specific language of retaining the lifting gas indicates it no longer does so. >
The removal of reference to the IP in the latest 10Q, despite BJ's note it is still "active" does not answer my specific question "is it still viable as submitted"...in fact, it has now become even fuzzier with the variables in PR's so noted.
Perhaps I worry to much about IP protection, but I sense a compromise to get a sale at work here and be first to market.
Removal of language to me is not a good sign.
m
Thank you Indyblue. Had lost access to that report.
Well therein lies the hopes MC had for the acquisition as an accretive asset.
Now what's it take to make it happen.
Note the reference to mobile ground stations they already have or have the ability to build.
I may be wrong but these are in addition to fixed ground stations.
m
Yes you are correct Ren. Scrutiny over and tiptoeing around press verbage a thing of the past.
Whether or not this managment decides to change what has become an imbedded culture of quiet prudence...we'll see.
m
Lol. Yes..same detailed explanation I have received.
However, all this exchange between Rattle's in depth DD into factoids, yours Monks and Indy's discussion have lead me to agreeing with you.
It appears that from what Rattle uncovered, of all the original appliques we acquired, which each had 10,000 free ESN's or ECN's on each one of them, all bit 2k and change are left after apparently Phipps has used up the rest.
So essentially, until new groundstation platforms are built, onto which the old appliques acquired are moved, then no new available free ECN's exist for WSGI.
I say move the old appliques as I don't see any other reason to call them a purchase asset unless they have the potential to be moved to generate more free ECNs.
Thus, the new ground station (s) is THE key catalyst for profitable GTC revenues and the lack of their execution closure thus far explains it all.
Indy is correct in pointing to periperal sales of gadgets as an area in which contract sales entities could be perhaps better employed.
I think where Mike's vision came in is he expected closures of ground stations in 2011 coupled with the sales of sky towers in 2012 (Argus) would exponentially raise the ramp up of revenue stream.
Thus, I think all our acquired applique assets are "dormant" revenue providers until placed on new grpund stations.
jmo
m
I wish you better luck than I've had.
I remember a side bar discussion at 2011 SHM in which MC stated that revenues from GTC alone would more than support the company.
Something has not happened that he expected to happen.
The what is the key.
I do know new ground stations was part of it as that was mentioned with a map of new locations. However, what no one asked then was "but you have had these appliques we bought somewhere for years...what are they doing and why did you buy them? For what purpose?"
m
Quite honestly I have been trying to determine for quite some time now (since acquisition.) exactly what those GTC applique "assets" are doing to generate revenue and have come to the conclusion as you have..nothing.
Additionally another unanswered question is what is the catalyst necessary to initiate revenues and what are the expectations in time to catalyst event and revenue expectations and margins.
Zip ...nada answers.
I don't buy that it has to be the last launch of GSAT's constellation for them to kick in. Makes absolutely no sense as a significant number of them are already on line and furthermore they just announced a "fix" for the old sats.
I am in Run's camp on this until someone provides some answers that will help me feel these are valuable assets.
I have a hunch that MC had in mind a direct tie-in to Argus sales for the catalyst and it hasn't panned out as quickly as suspected. But just a stab in the dark.
m
Counsel responded that provisional patent filed on BiB in August still active.
That's all she said.
m