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.
No worries, Ed. Petabytes are so rarely mentioned that spell check doesn't even know them yet. I apologize to all for the lack of formatting yesterday. I wrote that post in haste but it does back up my contention that if the user experience isn't good, the user will back out of the process, no matter what the content might be so it worked out as a positive reinforcement of what I was alluding to.
It's funny how that happens sometimes.
htj
Ed,
I guess that is going to happen no matter what industry is involved. The thing about infrastructure is that it is hardly faddish. Once a standard is established it is utilized as long as possible.
I suppose you could use the highway infrastructure and its evolution as an analogy to the current telecommunication infrastructure because they evolved in a similar fashion.
Think about the highway system in the 60's. State highways were two lane and served service roads for entry and exit. The interstate system introduced 4 lane divided roads and used exits for service access. Over time those roads were expanded to 6, 8 10 and even 12 lanes. The main reason for the transition was to accommodate more traffic with fewer bottlenecks.
The transition from analog to digital and then the introduction of 2,4,8,16 and 32 bit data paths served the same purpose, to accommodate traffic. 3G networks have wider data paths and more points of entry so the data can flow more smoothly. Photographs, bar codes, email, coupons and the sort take up a whole lot more room on the highway than SMS because they require more data space. The data infrastructure has to be able to handle large amounts of data simultaneously for camera phones to exist ubiquitously.
Remember I talked about the user experience. If a user experiences a delay or perceives a process to be unintuitive, then some users will stop and reverse course rather than proceed. There are programs out there that monitor the clicks on websites to see how the user navigates and where they go and where they don't go and why. Those programs also collect demographic information on the users that use websites and compare that data by projecting trends and producing potential bottlenecks and points of retreat. I am talking about marketing tools; not big brother stuff here but the network experience is very much the same.
When one buys a handset for whatever reason, whether it be for talking on the telephone, texting, taking pictures, shooting videos, or sending and receiving email, one becomes part of a demographic to the carrier and the use of those features becomes a set of statistics in their world. They decide what to add to the next standard based upon the current trends in the market.
That graph that I showed you about the proliferation of smart phones in the coming years tells me that the data path and speed of the next generation(s) of networks will have to accommodate massive amounts of data and when I say massive, I mean petabytes, not gigabytes or terabytes. Otherwise the network will bog down and cause unnecessary delays in the transmission of data.
The carriers have to have an adequate highway for the cars before they can sell faster cars. Otherwise they reach a point of diminishing returns. What is the point of selling a fast car, if that car is going to enter a road with bumper to bumper traffic? The evolution is a very carefully, well thought out, contrived place and the features that you, I or anyone else get on our handsets must be able to work well if that handset is going to sell well. Handset makers spend hundreds of millions of dollars developing hardware and software. There is no sense in making a high resolution camera if the data path is clogged. No sense making a video camera if there is no place to send or upload the videos.
The click through process requires a backhaul system of computers that overlap with the wireless space and that path must be unencumbered. Like I said before, if this process outruns the infrastructure, then it will fail or at the very least be slow to adapt. 3G makes all of this possible, The fact that it is somewhat prolific in the modern civilized world coupled with the fact that the 4G standard is being co-developed at the same time is a very, very good thing.
This market we discuss here is all about timing and as you pointed out very susceptible to being faddish. Whether or not it is a conscious or subconscious effort on the consumer’s part, for the most part they still want to buy features that they may or may not use. I think the core components will accommodate a myriad of different possibilities when it comes to passing technological fads but it is the User Interface that will determine how functional it can be and for how long.
When I mentioned earlier that the customizable user experience was important, I didn't put enough emphasis on just how important that was. The thing that makes smart phones smart is their ability to adapt in a rapidly changing environment. Using that pretence when buying a handset will serve you well when you decide to purchase your next "phone".
IMO,
htj
Where did you get that impression, if you don't mind me asking?
There are varying degrees of functionality in handsets these days but there has not been (to date) a major shift in the composition of the reception of any of the carriers. They (the carriers) have different levels of compatibility but they have had to do that at a price. They cannot obsolete any of the current/older technologies without disenfranchising customers so they must add the various capabilities to the reception towers as new technologies emerge. The real trick is integrating these older standards with the new but that is a behind the scenes ordeal and a whole other discussion.
RIMM was one of the first to incorporate multiple network capabilities supporting worldwide standards and a few others followed in time. This subject gets a little muddy if one gets into a global discussion over specific capabilities so I will wait on your answer before I elaborate any further. I will say this, though... Cell towers today support multiple network protocols. Some even support the 4G standard. As time goes along, the lower tier protocols will be dropped but I don't see that happening in the near future. Like you said, you still have an older design and it works just fine for you. There is a plan for obsolescence/attrition but it is long term, not short. The handsets will die before the network they support does. Isn't that ironic?
Maybe some of you have wireless networks at home for your computers. If you look closely at the wireless hub it might say wireless A,B,D or G. Each of these technologies evolved from a previous one. As each new one was introduced, the previous became obsolete. Not in a functional way but in a evolutionary way. There are still wireless A devices and they work with a wireless G router but they will never work at the speed of a wireless G router. The routing hardware steps up or down to fit the least common denominator in the network makeup.
If there were a thousand devices in a network and 999 wireless G devices encountered a wireless A device, they would lower their speed to accommodate the slower device. Given that information, I would suggest that if any of you have an older device and you think it is going to perform better as the technology improves you would be wrong. Compatibility is backwards, not forwards. Update the handset and the new speed and/or capabilites instantly become available.
The same goes for optics in current devices. VGA is a definition, not an expanding capability. Lower resolution devices will not improve in their scope or capability as time goes on. The devices that replace them, though, will most certainly take advantage of the newer technologies.
htj
Howard,
Thank you for the encouraging remark. I went back and looked at the Electrical Engineering Times projections for smart phones and I thought it might be relevant to post the results as I promised. This article is fairly unbiased because it is from EETimes and not an industry rag. Pay close attention to the graph for smart phone growth in the coming years. I encourage all of you to either click on, or copy and paste the links below into your browser. ...or you can read the text below the links.
http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=215800530
http://i.cmpnet.com/eetimes/eedesign/2009/chart1_030409.gif
Here is the content for those of you who aren't comfortable with links and/or redirects..
Smartphone shipments to grow 6-11%, iSuppli says
Dylan McGrath
EE Times
(03/04/2009 2:33 PM EST)
SAN FRANCISCO—Global shipments of smartphone handsets are projected to increase between 6 and 11 percent in 2009, reaching as high as 193.3 million units, according to market research firm iSuppli Corp.
Tina Teng, a senior analyst for wireless communications at iSuppli (El Segundo, Calif.) said shipments could grow by 11 percent if wireless network operators cut fees for data services and offer aggressive subsidies to reduce consumer smartphone prices. But if if consumer confidence continues to erode, growth in smartphone shipments will be closer to 6 percent, Teng warned.
Depending on the growth rate, smartphones could account for between 16.6 percent and 17.4 percent of total mobile handset unit shipments in 2009, according to iSuppli's forecast.
Overall handset sales are expected to decrease 9 percent in 2009, topping out at 1.08 billion units, according to Strategy Analytics, another market research firm. ISuppli is projecting overall handset shipments to decrease 12 percent to 1.11 billion units in 2009.
But the relative strength of the smartphone market—driven by a strong consumer appetite for gadgets like Apple Inc.'s iPhone—is projected as a rare bright spot, offering a lifeline to IC suppliers who make chips used in them.
Last month, Forward Concepts released a study that projects smartphone shipments will grow 13 percent in 2009.
Projections of smartphone growth from various market research firms are difficult to compare because there is no standard definition of the product category. ISuppli defines smart phones as mobile handsets that use high-level operating systems, allowing them to expand their functionality via sophisticated add-on applications, such as personal information management programs, the firm said.
"With 3G networks having become prevalent all over the world, smart phones are no longer just for corporate users—they are for consumers, too," Teng said. "Consumers increasingly are demanding data-intensive applications that require the kinds of high data speeds supported by 3G networks."
With the rise of the smartphone market, Teng said, battle lines are forming around operating systems used in these devices, including Microsoft Corp.'s Windows Mobile, Symbian Foundation's OS, Research in Motion's RIM OS, Apple's Mac X OS, Palm's OS, the Google-backed Android and other Linux-based operating systems.
"Beyond the friendliness of user interfaces, the availability of a variety of applications is the key factor attracting consumer interest to smartphone products," Teng said. "Thus, different players at various segments of the supply-chain are starting to build mini-ecosystems—including applications—in order to attract consumers and gain their loyalty."
htj
Post processing can be a number of things but the bottom line is mathematical processes being applied to the data captured. There is a litany of things that fall into the category of post processing but the major players are anti-aliasing (making sure that the dots captured are the dots that are supposed to be there) sharpness (making sure the lines are properly defined) and contrast (making sure that the measurement of light and exposure are consistent throughout the image) If any one of those things fall short, the interpretation of the data can be flawed. The higher the resolution of the camera, the smaller the potential for these things to be wrong. Post processing makes up for what the camera cannot do. If that process takes too long then the user experience is affected. There is a careful mix of pre and post processing decisions that have to be made by hardware and software to get the right mix. Intelligence in the handset make this possible. Logo recognition can be analytical or comparative depending on the initial point of reference. If there is something existing to compare it to, then back end processing is the norm. If there isn't than the analytical would be the preferred method of interpretation. Both work, but one works faster. You hear front end and back end processing mentioned and you can derive from those two instances which is appropriate. Hope that helps. What you asked has a large amount of room for interpretation so I focused on a very small part of it. I hope I didn't miss the spot.
htj
That's true Ed. The good news is that this industry has the luxury of facilitating game changers that provide innovation. Someone has to set the bar and someone has to live up to it. Sure there have been some flops but there have been even more successes. The camera is not innovative until it becomes a tool and software facilitates that. The network is just a passage for information but software facilitates it being tool for providing data to an from the request and receipt. These things were not the standard nor were they the predominant use of the cellular technology until someone created software to transform the phone into a smarter device. The amount of technology that can be stuffed into a handset these days is phenomenal to say the least and the intelligence of the operating system is nothing short of incredible but there is more to come and we are witnessing the infancy of the next generation of intelligence in the handset market. Like I said before, the OS was the limiting factor in generation 1 and the network was the limiting factor in generation 2. Now that we are in G3 of the evolution of handsets and network development, the tools are emerging and the users are responding. I will try to look up some market data that projects the growth of smart phones over the next 3-4 years and post a link for you guys. The growth is astounding. Units are measured in the hundreds of millions not tens of millions. These numbers make possible technological acceptance of many different software platforms and secondary capabilities. Again, you are right that the right camera maker will reap the rewards of this evolution but the public will be the big winner in the end. Choices are many now instead of few and application software in the handset is now the norm instead of an exception. I get that you are comfortable with what you have but sooner or later the choices wont include what you are used to. That will be a turning point for not only the industry but for the mindset of the buying public. The old paradigm was that we got a phone with some options. The new paradigm is that we get a handset with a customizable environment. That much wont change unless you consider getting better change. These are interesting times we live in Ed. The days of 4 on the floor and posi-traction are long gone. Now we have variable assist, on demand intelligent traction control and brains that make millions of decisions per second driving our lives. I can't say that the rotary dial is a dinosaur though. It comes in handy when the power goes out. You know what they say... you never see the tsunami until it hits the shore. By then, it is too late to react. The question isn't whether or not it is coming, the question is when and where. Many have been waiting a long time for these questions to be answered. Many believe that time is anon. Good luck to you and everyone that has persevered this fickle industry.
Ed,
I have addressed some of this issue in that past if you want to go back and read my posts. The one thing that will seem readily apparent is that I was under the distinct impression that the technology would emerge sooner than later and I was mistaken about that. The roadmap for the expansion of 3G and the adoption of 3Mp as a standard took longer than the companies creating the technology projected. Billions of dollars have been poured into the infrastructure and things are much better on the network side. I have learned to look at it as an evolutionary process rather than a starting and stopping point. The camera phone industry is very similar. There have been very few actual game changers introduced since I first started posting several years ago and that is a lesson in and of itself. For the longest time, the handset makers dictated the content of the OS and its extremities. Now, thanks to Apple, RIMM, Palm and a few early adopters of an open OS, we have many choices that we didn't have before. There still remains the issue of specific applications of the camera and the lack of application based software support for manipulation and control over the focal area. Newer phones have more than just an image sensor. Some have SOC with the processor and image sensor built together but that is not the be all end all because there is a tremendous amount of pressure being put on the handset makers to deliver smaller, more capable electronics with smaller footprints so the miniaturization of components is behind the demand for delivery. Most handset manufacturers want a SOC solution with multiple I/O paths and they want it to take up almost no room within the camera space. In the next year you will see such items fit into a 4-6mm space and still have much in the form of external capabilities. I suppose the obvious answer to some of this would be developing software that would post process the image. That is fine but it must support a clean, swift user experience so there are challenges there as well. I am looking for a monolithic camera with a minimum 3Mp resolution that has built in auto-focus with an extended focal area that fits in a 4-6mm space within one year. Who will build it? All of the image sensor manufacturers are racing to see who gets this to market first. Who will win is TBD. The technology exists now but the problem is in QA and yeild. When someone comes out with this product, they have to be able to produce it in the 100's of millions. There are some challenges there as well. The image sensor market, the handset OS market and the software App market is maturing. We are no longer in Phase One of this fledgling industry. When it hits it will run because all of the potential bottlenecks are shrinking as the market grows. I could draw you some charts but I don't think that is necessary. Hopefully I have explained it in a way that most anyone can understand. Thanks for responding.
htj
I agree. The projection for smart phones for the upcoming year is 265 million worldwide. That is 20% of the market. That number is expected to grow significantly in the next 3-5 years with over a half a billion in 2012. Technologies that seem fringe will become the mainstream as another part of the market converges. Soon enough 3Mp will be the low end and 5-8Mp will be the standard. The smart phone will take the place of several internet appliances that we currently carry as separate items. Your tongue in cheek remark was very insightful. Companies like Google, RIMM and Palm will try to duplicate the Apple app store and locked OS platforms will eventually become a thing of the past.
htj
Good question SRM. Adaptation and/or adoption of WFC has been slight to this point. Not because it doesn't work but because it doesn't work well on low resolution camera chips. The interpolation algorithms (anti-aliasing, dithering, sharpness, etc.) work better with multiple passes in the interpolative process. The more data present, the more finite this process. This is more a by-product than a limitation. Also, I personally thought that the higher resolution cameras would catch on much more quickly than they have. Of course, when I say caught on I am talking about a global market, not a local market like the US. We are a small fraction of the total user base on the planet so the proliferation of higher resolution handsets has been slower than I projected. The good news is that 3Mp is here and VGA-1.3Mp is all but gone. That means two things. One, prices for higher resolution chips have dropped significantly and two, capabilities have increased at a similar price point.
We are reaching a point of convergence in the price, capabilities, availability of infrastructure and a general diversity that is unprecedented. I have looked at 3G network coverage of the major carriers recently and they are thousands of percent larger than they were 4 years ago. Infrastructure is the key to this or any technology that requires front-end and back-end communication. The least common denominator in this process is the weakest link and the weakest links are far fewer than before. We have had discussions about the differences between the US cellular/data infrastructure and the rest of the world before and the major difference from then and now is that the US is standardizing somewhat in their data communications capabilities and sharing more technology than before. Comparing the US to the rest of the world in terms of technological advancement is a slippery slope, though. While we do have the best in hardware and software, we don't have nearly as much as anyone else on the planet in terms of concurrent users on any platform.
There are a few "smart" phones out there that have EDOF capabilities but the technology has not as of present become mainstream. I can speculate where it might show up next but that would be a bit reckless on my part. I will know more soon about the next products that will support this technology and I will give you my perspective as they become realware instead of vaporware. To date, no tier one handset maker has adopted EDOF or WFC technology but 3mp chip based handsets will change all of that in the very near future. Now that I know much more about the technology, I can post with a fair amount of certainty that the technology will be more readily available as 3Mp handset become more mainstream. There will be some knockoff technologies that will simulate the real deal but that is to be expected. The handset world is a cut throat environment and every penny spent must guarantee a ROI for the vendor.
I do have to give kudos to Apple. They have turned the existing paradigm of a closed OS upside down. Now everyone wants an App store and everyone is willing to throw a bit of caution to the wind when it comes to support of the handsets. The main reason for that is the ability for these handsets to connect to multiple radio frequencies. Wi-Fi phones can be nuked and rebuilt over the airwaves. Before, they had to be handled by a customer support department. This is internet 2.0 and it is good. Folks who support multiple networks, and allow customization of the App environment will thrive in the near future and those technologies are the most likely to adapt tangent technologies like WFC or EDOF, depending on the patent set they support.
Speaking of patents and more specifically disputes, ScanBuy, let's get this damn dispute either settled or pony up for the license. Every day this thing goes unresolved is a day you and NeoMedia could be making some real money. There are billions of dollars sitting on the sidelines waiting to see how this is all going to shake out. Get it over with would you? The market is huge and you guys are piddling around trying to decide who's turn it is to hold your finger in the dyke when all you have to do is take it out and let it break. Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees... Sheesh! IMO
htj
jcg0176,
As much as I hate to do it, I agree with you. Nothing personal, mind you, it just goes against the general grain of this board for me to do so. While the dissenters are not always genuine in their intent and/or delivery, it is important for all of us to understand exactly why we believe what we believe. Sure, there are trolls here and yes, some of them are here for the sole reason of obfuscating the truth for whatever reason but we need to know the difference between what is real and what is fabrication or conjecture. Responding to these folks is the key to making that clear. When we present facts to the contrary of what someone is suggesting as their own version of the facts, we learn what is true and what is not. It keeps our beliefs from being blind and blind beliefs lead to ignorance and I am not an advocate of anyone believing just for the sake of believing. This will probably get deleted but for those who read it before it does I implore you to think about the negativity objectively before you make up your mind about anything. Hearing one side of a story never leads anyone to the proper conclusion. I am of the opinion that this is on topic so if I am violating the TOS then I apologize in advance to the MODS.
htj
Hawk,
NITE is Knight Securities, L.P.
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2004-173.htm
Maybe this article will provide a bit of insight into NITE and its internal dealings.
GLTA
My opinion is that they are accumulating massive amounts of the security. I can't prove that but they have shown an overwhelming interest as of late. This information was not hard to find TP. I am curious why you haven't posted it. If you have, my apologies.
htj
Thanks for all of your hard work and DD, clawmann.
I too, am saddened by the passing of Dr. Myke. I wish upon his family and friends both here and away safe passage through their mourning and hope that they find peace in their grief sooner rather than later. He certainly will be missed. My hope is that he will be able to witness the final chapters in spirit, if not in body. RIP Doc.
htj
Hey Total_Package,
Were you the one who said that you had shorted this security at one time? Not trying to beat you up, just curious?
htj
no i've posted about other software patents i dont like as well so no need to feel personally persecuted.
as i've said before even though USPTO approved the patent i'm advising people who ask me it's much to do about nothing until the first court case.
Dean,
Out of curiosity, why would you think that a patent that has not only been established, but upheld in an arduous review can be so easily challenged in court where the plaintiff has neither a patent nor prior art to present as their part of the case? Furthermore, you state that you have posted about other software patents that you do not like... I read all of your posts and found no posts on any IH board that refer to software patents. Can you be more specific in your allegation? One last thing. When you refer to a court case being much ado about nothing are you referring to companies that bring suit against Neomedia or Neomedia brining suit against infringers? I would think that depending on the direction of the suit there would indeed be much ado if it were the latter but IMO it would be an exercise in futility if it were the former considering there are no other patents that would qualify and any art rendered in the review would most likely be not allowed.
htj
LAS VEGAS—NeuStar, the company behind the common short code registry, today unveiled the a successful demonstration and implementation of technology that enables cell phones and other mobile devices to scan and process two-dimensional bar codes – regardless of the mobile service provider, type of bar code symbology or scanning technology used.
Dean,
Based on your comments, you apparently either have not read thoroughly the above statement or you have and simply do not understand it. The alternative, I suppose, is that you do not have any idea what you are talking about. I read your blog and it offers no more information than you posted here. I was hoping that you just missed something but that does not seem to be the case. Yes, there has been some discontinuity between the American providers but that is because they are different companies with different ideas. What you perceive to be a screw up is really a free competitive market that has not yet standardized on many levels. The 3G standard is the only one that matters right now and the fact that NeuStar can circumvent the individual companies providing data access and discreetly create a layer to the network protocol is completely overlooked by your comments. Please do a bit more research before you post such nonsense. I could write a volume rebut to your statement but I feel like that would be counterproductive since most people here "get it" and you don't. Your comments show that you are both hostile toward a company having protection in the space and ignorant to the way the technology works. I would post this on your blog, but I doubt it would get through the screening process. IMO.
Don't get me wrong, I have a tremendous respect for your country and your citizens, but you are just plain wrong on many fronts here.
htj
Just a shout out to the old timers here... (you guys know who you are) I sure am glad the patent issue is behind us. Now comes the fun part... All indicators from the handset world say that the semiconductor market has hit bottom and is currently rebounding. News from iSupply and TSMC say that orders are starting to come in anew that were currently on hold. Some of the handset makers have delayed plans to offer new handsets and new features but that delay seems to be a temporary one. Don't get discouraged by news you hear about handset makers over the short term. All of that can change when the demand changes. One thing that has been good from this shake out is the downturn in production numbers for VGA. This represents a trend toward the elimination of the lower resolution camera phones. The baseline image processor is now in the 2mp range, up from VGA. This will widen the proliferation of phones that are applicable to NEOM's software in a shorter time than thought by some. Also, many different new smart phones with much higher resolution cameras are slated for the second half of this year that utilize newer technologies not mass produced before. All in all, I would say we are looking at a very positive time in the short to mid term future. Now that management has some of the more difficult hurdles out of the way, it is time for them to get to work on securing some corporate commitments and long term contracts for the company. I am looking forward to seeing a revenue projection path to match the growth of the industry as well one that supports recent and future growth in the price of the security. Good luck to all that persevered (and to the new folks as well).
htj
Well Ben,
You asked a mouthful there. The short answer to your question is that there are no short answers to your questions. I don't have time right now to fully explain the hows and whys of shorting but I will post something about it later on when I have time to compose an answer. Ameritrade doesn't allow shorting on OTCBB stocks as a policy. That is not necessarily the rule everywhere. More to follow...
htj
Ben88 stated:
"Since one cannot "short" NEOM stock, the day trader has to own a rather large number of shares and also be able to transact a large number of shares per order in order to make the trade worth the brokerage and other fees involved per order."
http://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/trading/ViewShortableStocks.php?key=neom&cntry=usa&tag=....
...says there are 900,000 shares available for shorting. Last time I checked there was 1 Mil.
Somebody is shorting this stock. Why don't you look into the exchanges listed and see if you can find out. The fact that there is even a number there in the availability inquiry suggests to me that it is possible that number was higher at some point than the 1Mil I saw. Given the trading range and volume, 1Mil is plenty enough to manipulate this stock. Let's not be so hasty to jump to conclusions.
htj
INAP has done okay since a 1:10 R/S quite a while back.
They were over a buck when they did it, and they had just started having profitable quarters.
Jonsie,
All reverse splits are not unsuccessful. This is an extreme example of being in the right place at the right time but once you read the press releases you might find yourself getting an eerie sense of deja vu. Like I said, this is just an example of what could happen if the circumstances were ideal. I am not trying to project anything that could be considered certainty. Give it a look and make your own decision. FRPT reverse split at 1:12 in late 2005/early 2006. Since then they have done quite well. The RS came at a time when being on a different exchange was prudent to the company and it allowed many instead of a few to recognize the security. Timing is the key to success in this arena. Revenue must be either promised and/or established before the RS can be successful. (Again, I am not advocating what should be done, I am simply illustrating what can be done given the right set of circumstances)
htj
FRPT on NSDQ
Do your own DD.
Hey Sean,
Are you sure it wasn't Network 365
http://network365.com/
Valista Corp out of Ireland? I seem to remember that. Anyway, here the link.
Good call today. I think I like Mr. Hoffman. He seems like the type of person who doesn't cater to the "I can't" type of personality. I would venture to guess those folks end up on their rear end in the parking lot. He seemed very upbeat and determined in his tone today. Knowing that one has an additional year of financing gives one the ability to set some short and medium term goals. Simply stated today, their biggest challenge is to become profitable by making money not by borrowing money. This goal can only be realized by adding a dozen high energy sales people "of which they have made room for" to get in cozy with the major telecoms in the minor markets. I am glad to see that he has looked beyond what Neomedia must do after they have sold off the non-essential assets. He made several telling statements today which reinforce my personal belief that the US will be the hardest nut to crack because of the Telecoms and the FCC. Having said that, he contends that the Asian, South American and North America sans the US will be the easiest to penetrate. He also noted that the US would fall into place when the others were penetrated but not until then. The reason for that is the high cost of infrastructure and support in the US market. The Qode software has to be bulletproof before any of the US carriers will touch it and what better way to make it bulletproof than to introduce it and implement it into the lesser markets. "$33.00 dollars per 611 call in resources create a customer service nightmare" were his exact words. Now we know why all of the seemingly myopic test markets are necessary.
Mr. Hoffman also remained upbeat as several callers conveyed their dismay about the share price. He retorted by stating as matter of factly as he could that the only way this would get turned around would be by producing revenues. He knows that the bridge is under attack but he also knows that without revenue the patents are eventually in danger of falling into the hands of the competition. His focus is clear and his mission is concise. Sell NeoMedia solutions to every entity that markets to a limited or focused audience. The market is worldwide and it is huge. Gavitec is an integral piece to the revenue puzzle and it is profitable. It needs to be a lot more profitable. There are already success stories out there so there is no need to sell pie in the sky. The universal reader is another integral piece of the proverbial puzzle so there needs to be seamless integration and a modular turnkey solution that can be implemented in either phases or out right as a single solution. He seems to know that and is very focused on getting the word out there. I think he made it clear that revenue is the only thing that can offset dilution and he aims to eventually make further dilution a non issue. I think that the 4 quarter approach is a more realistic goal than by EOY because things will happen in the next two quarters that make meaningful revenue possible and probable in subsequent quarters. Neomedia has been assured that they are going to have financing going further and they are still discussing the strategic partnership with potential suitors. I personally think that the first Telecom to come on board will be that suitor and they will also be the ones to provide Neomedia with a much needed cash infusion. Of course, they will be offered a discount on tranactions and they will inevitably make a larger ROI than the others.
The nay-sayers have already started posting that the CC was rigged with pumpers that agreed with everything said and purposefully disregarded the company's financial situation. I heard about 12 calls today from folks of all nationalities. Some were the usual suspects and some were quite clear about their disdain for the company. I hardly call that a pumpers CC. Last I looked, the number to call was toll free and all who wanted to could call, listen in and interact. All of those cry baby posters from the other boards had an opportunity to call in today and some chose to abstain. In my opinion they passed up a perfectly good opportunity to call in and convey legitimate concerns to management. Why they would think that the CC was rigged is beyond me. It is clear that there are those out there who want everyone to believe that Neomedia is going to go bankrupt. There are also those who believe that the EFF can keep businesses from doing business with Neomedia by creating the sentiment that the Patents are suspect and are going to be over turned in appeal. Well, the opposite can also come from those posts. One, is that the patents are Neomedia's and the fact that they are being attacked from every direction known to man is an indication, at least to me, that they are coveted. Secondly, the potential businesses out there that want to do business today and not tomorrow aren't going to sit around and "wait" for Neomedia to either go bankrupt or relinquish the patents. Cornell knows that and Mr. Hoffman stated that in the CC today. He said that Cornell was going to wait until Neomedia became profitable. Cornell knows that the market is more profitable than the pieces of paper containing the patents and Cornell is not in the business of running businesses. They are in the business of financing businesses. Much to the chagrin of all of the other PWC players out there, Neomedia currently owns and controls the patents. Until they are overturned or sold, they will continue to own the patents. No amount of braying can change that so those who have been braying the loudest, and you know who you are, you might as well reserve yourself to the fact that until something changes, you are on the outside looking in. Mr. Hoffman is very astute and he already has the ear of the Telecoms and the infrastructure providers. He is a no nonsense guy that does not seem to know how to take no for an answer. Until he proves to be otherwise, he has my support and I will continue to advocate Neomedia technology as the best possible solution for PWC media connectivity.
Finally, if I was a Neomedia employee who was offered stock options as an employment incentive. I would be more interested in making those options worth more than I would be buying cheap shares. For those who already have options, the incentive is to make those options worth more. Simply buying the stock at an inexpensive price is not enough. The only thing accomplished by that would be that we all have a whole lot of cheap shares. What then? Making those shares worth something is the most important issue and I believe that Mr. Hoffman addressed that issue today. The patents are worthless unless they are generating revenue. IMO. GLTA
htj
100% correct you are. I was simply trying to get folks to understand that the looking glass appears to be a mirror on our side of it. Until some brave soul actually sticks their head through it, we won't know otherwise. Your job is to convince all of these good folks (as consumers) that there is indeed something on the other side and it is worth having. Thanks for your reply. That instant feedback thing will tend to speed things up quite a bit. IMO.
OT:
I went back and read all of your posts. Quality stuff. Thanks.
htj
Doc,
You pose a loaded question there. I suppose the world is going to have to stick their proverbial big toe in the water before they swim. People are not wired to think 3 dimensionally. They are wired to think 2 dimensionally. We use our senses but we rarely stop to think about whether we are trusting our sight, taste, touch, smell or our hearing until we distrust one of the others. When we see a 2 dimensional object (let's say printed matter) we read it. That is what we have been programmed to do. Adding a QR code to the printed matter may spark a bit of inquisitiveness in a few but it won't cause us to change our way of thinking until we add functional meaning to the QR code. (a 3rd dimension) Advertisers have to understand that the code is a link and be able to add meaning to it in order to sell it to its customers. They can do this by creating levels of functionality and levels of value. By demonstrating interactivity the advertising customers can choose what level of functionality they can add to their product and determine levels of value for each. Additionally, the advertising customers can figure what level of functionality that they want to add to each additional level and assign a dollar amount to each event. They can then use technical analysis on each facet of added functionality to project revenue and ROI which in this case is the additional cost of each level of added functionality. Bottom line, is that the advertising creates the interest, the interactivity personalizes the experience and provides the advertiser critical feedback needed to further understand the demographics and how what they do affects the experience.
I think this is an easy sell for added value on many different levels. Levels that must be first understood by the Ad execs and then passed on to the Sales Execs. It is more than just selling a product, it becomes selling an experience. Those who get that, will succeed. Those who fill the QR code with "additional information" will be less likely to gain value from the product. What separates Clear Channel from the other billboard advertisers will be added value and interactivity.
Advertising is all about changing perception of products. Now advertisers have the opportunity to change our perception about advertising. This really is a unique opportunity for those bold enough to embrace it.
Madison Avenue carries a lot of clout. Enough clout to change the minds of certain companies that have built artificial barriers limiting how those companies on Madison Avenue operate. Like I said, it is an easy sell when the right people are selling it. It is literally all about perception. IMO.
htj
Doc,
If that is the case, then they are missing the forrest due to the trees. Time will tell.
htj
Clear Channel Advertising in my area has just (in the past 6-8 months) erected new billboards built with the same technology that is used in football stadiums. This technology allows the advertiser to program many billboards, not just one into the board as well as advertising for the billboard company itself. The content can be changed and updated easily and can also be used as a supplement to the Amber alert network. Digital content can be quickly uploaded to the billboard sites with photographs and critical information. This dynamic approach rather than the static approach means that many, not just one advertisement can be displayed locally on a single board and that consumers (while sitting at a single traffic signal) can be exposed to up to 12 advertisements. If all of those advertisements yielded QR Codes then the clickable content would increase exponentially. The resolution on these boards is quite good as they are self illuminated and the color is very crisp and clean. Clear channel owns an entire network of radio and television stations so the budget for infrastructure is quite large. Billboards are just the beginning of interactive media. I have stated all along that location would be the key to success for any interactive marketing so it is time to start thinking of the Clear Channel approach to advertising in many, not just a few public places, like Airports, Malls, Grocery Stores and Movie Theaters. (places that hold the attention span of consumers for more than a few minutes) The NeoReader occurs at the perfect time for all of these mediums to converge. Combine RFID into the equation (the next phase of interactive) and the content becomes that much more robust. I attended a conference recently where several companies were displaying interactive technologies including NEC, IBM, Cisco, Cannon and a company called Teklynx. These companies represent some of the infrastructure that will make interactive advertising a reality. For you technologists out there, check out the Teklynx company. They are the relational part of the technology. It is real, and it is available today. GLTA,
htj
that's what I thought. Cornell can do better by keeping the co. alive and selling shares in the future.
Dr. Mike
________________________________
Dr. Mike,
Until the patents run out, they are worth their weight in gold. Everyone, please feel free to post information to the contrary.
Remember, please post links. I have had enough conjecture to last a lifetime.
htj
G'nite all
Well, The proof that I have that I am going on is that fact that we have NO money, the silence of management and the fact that management has continued to jump ship and NEOM isnt even wasting the time or effort to attend ANY of the related tradeshows. If Cornell wanted NEOM to be shed in a good light, they would pony up a few bucks and help NEOM attend the shows and conferences to look good...Cornell has not done this. Why? I could give you many many more reasons.
IMO, management has been leaving as they dont want to be involved when the hammer drops. They want to be long gone. When folks leave for greener pastures, that is NOT a good sign.
So is this proof? I guess it depends on who you ask. Trust me, I am down some 95% on my investment and it sucks!!! I would love nothing more that to be told I was wrong, but it looks to me that a BK filing is going to happen.
_____________________________________
Last post to you and then I am done.
"We" weren't out of money at the last CC and we aren't out of money until we have no assets. Post where we sold off all of our assets and have used our last liquid funds to file for BK.
The silence of the managements proves nothing more than they don't want to talk to you or anyone else.
Far be it from me to defend Cornell but if I held the wheel of this boat I would vote for some management and BOD changes. What makes you think they jumped ship? Could it be that someone cut off the candy man? Enough of me speculating, the bottom line is that until I or you or any other share holder hears differently, this boat is still afloat. Using phrases like "the proof that I am going on is that fact that we have NO money" is unsubstantiated. Where is your proof?
htj
Share price The market
_____________________________
Is that the price of the IP or the perception of its indemnity?
HTJ...I love the spin, but how long can NEOM survive being flat broke and "IP"less? Why waste time comparing us with others in the industry, thats NOT the point here. The point here is that we have been so horribly mismanaged and Cornell now has everything that at one time was a company called NEOM.
Who cares if other companies arent out of diapers? What does that have to do with NEOM and the 10,000 ft hole that Chas and Co. has dug for us?
If NEOM does not get the $10 Million, how long do you think they can survive? I would love to hear your answer.
__________________________________________________
Well, there is an easy answer to that one... Until the PR that they are indeed broke, or until they announce the infusion of the cash. That is my answer.
The point is, that you don't know and neither do I. I have heard enough rough adverbs here. When you get proof of your acumen, please post it. In the mean time, post some facts based upon real links to real data from real people or real sources. How about you do me a single favor. Post me some evidence that the IP is indeed fully in the control of Cornell and out of control of Neomedia. Let's start there. If you want to build a case, then let's start with the meat.
htj
HTJ...I hope that you arent asking me to waste my time putting together a fancy posting with links and references.
I have been here for 3 years and I can tell you that IMO what is happening is the end game here.
To simply answer a few of your questions.
I have heard NOTHING from NEOM or Cornell. I believe there is a reason for this and it isn't good. NEOM is flat broke and this pull the wool over shareholders eyes charade can not go on much longer. Again as I have said many times, Cornell has what they want and NEOM now has NOTHING. At the rate NEOM is going, it is impossible to survive. Cornell is the only one that will benefit either way. IMO
Man I hope hope I am wrong-!!
__________________________________
I am no more asking you to waste your time presenting me with acumen to your assertions than I am asking you to disprove anyone who has posted on this board over the past few weeks. What I really want to know is if you have any substantial evidence to prove your assertion that NeoMedia is going bankrupt. The CC and 10K will tell for sure if they are but I need to know if you have proof.
Thanks.
htj
Follow the money. If Cornell holds the IP, NEOM is worthless.
___________________________________
Worthless to whom? Is Cornell a black hole of technology. Have they been notorious for selling IP from company's that they have financed in the past? Are they going to put the blue jeans on the black market for pennies on the dollar when they can make money off of them outright? Please cite cases in which they have settled for 10% on the dollar when they could have made much, much more.
Thanks,
htj
Doc,
They aren't worthless until you actually sell them, until then, they are only worth less.
Percentage wise, you don't have a whole lot left to lose but statistically, you have everything to gain. Put your shares in a cookie jar and place them out of the children's' reach. They will be safe there for now. Do what you will, but know that there is nothing else in the industry that has even gotten out of diapers, let alone matured in the free world. Give the industry a chance to crawl before you abandon it completely. Then give it a chance to walk. As I stated before, the "industry" hasn't even finished testing the waters. Many factors are prevalent in this industry. We cannot just kick the door in and demand entry.
A challenge for all of you who spend way too much time telling us how wrong we are. Present to me another company's financials stating that they have made money and if so how much in the past year off of PWC software/hardware. While you are at it, please compare those revenues to Gavitec and tell me on average whether they are gaining or losing ground to the instance and occurrence of Gavitec. I will check in tomorrow for answers. Thanks again.
IMO,
htj
After reading this wonderful work of garbage, I do not wonder at all why most all of the rats have jumped ship. Could NEOM really do any worse? I think Cornell is leading us out behind the barn right now. It wont be long before it is all over IMO.
David Dodge, thank for all of your work. (excuse me while I PUKE!!!)
IMO, a BK filing will be within a few weeks at the latest if this is the route we are traveling. UUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
_______________________________________________________________________________
Sort of off topic: Maybe on, who knows anymore. Sorry Mods
What have you heard from new management that has led you to believe that anything has gone on to suggest negative movement in the company's direction or that bankruptcy is imminent? Conversely, what have you heard that makes you think that the current message is one of avarice on the part of Cornell?
I would prefer that you cite specific references and not the board. Links would be best. Thanks.
htj
yj and htj... when I asked NEOM for some keywords and qodes, they told me that others clicking on my code or using my keyword would cost ME (the owner of the code, 5 cents per click....so where is the charge to the consumer? I assume only thru the carrier charges, or do I have this wrong?
Dr. Mike
Dr. Mike,
I hate to have to do this but I am going to base part of my answer upon an assumption because I have a phone that does not support Qode. While there is a promise to support Blackberry in the near future, that day is not here. So, let's break this down into a few different scenarios (real world and hypothetical) and let's see how it goes.
1) Qode is downloaded to the handset by the user and the user interacts directly with the advertiser. Pay per click charges are assessed directly to the advertiser by Neomedia. Cell phone uses (this is where the assumption comes in) the data package purchased by the consumer to handle the transaction and the carrier gets no additional payment, regardless of the number of clicks.
2) Qode is once again downloaded by the user onto the phone and SMS is used to interact with the advertiser. Again, consumer either pays for each SMS individually or uses part of a pre-negotiated allotment per the user contract with the carrier. Advertiser still pays Neomedia per SMS as a click through. Carrier gets paid in accordance with the user agreement by the consumer.
3) Carrier pre loads Qode into the handset as an application. The consumer gets whatever plan the consumer wants whether it be Voice and SMS or Voice and Data. Advertiser pays Neomedia per click as usual but Neomedia pays carrier a predetermined amount per transaction in return for getting the Qode software pre-installed. (Again an assumption. Probably somewhere between a fraction of a penny and a penny per click depending on whether the sum is negotiated per click or per transaction) All Neomedia is doing is subsidizing the data use and paying for expanding the infrastructure to handle the additional data overhead used by the application.
I am sure there are a few scenarios that I left out because I haven't sat down and charted all of the variables. The deal with the carrier wouldn't be the most profitable net wise for Neomedia but it would garner the most exposure. The advertisers wouldn't really care because any one of the above three scenarios would work for the advertiser. Bottom line is that the infrastructure is already in place with a few caveats. One is that the carrier is and should be naturally paranoid of any application that could jeopardize their bandwidth. Two is that the revenue created by the agreement to pre-install the software would not be instantly profitable to the carrier because the carrier would have to use all or a portion to upgrade the infrastructure to handle the increase in traffic over the network. Three, success is a double edged sword. If a campaign is particularly successful, it could jam the circuits and deny regular users from making voice calls. Additionally, if some advertiser got smart and decided to do a short promotion to a captive audience (say a Michgan/Notre Dame football game) that lasted approximately five hours by posting the Aztec symbol on the stadium gates and having them printed in the program and bought some JumboTron time to announce the give-away/promotion, an unbalanced crowd (meaning that a majority of cell users were users of a single carrier) then the promotion could flop because the circuits would be busy. Having a crowd of 100,000 that are represented by 5 major carriers break down into an average share of 20% is an unreasonable marketing statistic so I would predict that one or more carriers would get overwhelmed and where does that leave the advertiser who paid for a live interactive promotion?
So, what does this mean? It means that until the carriers have adequate bandwidth, the carriers are going to be IMO reluctant to add Qode to the installed base of applications. However, if Qode is a downloadable application that can not be regulated by the carrier (again an assumption) because the action is data send and receive that has nothing to do with the carrier specifically, then the carriers are going to wake up at some point and realize that they are the shepherds of a business that they need a piece of. Not necessarily to be greedy but to facilitate doing a better job of making the network that they are supporting as useful and as satisfying to the user as possible.
If anyone knows specific carriers that have Qode blocked at an SMS or data level, please let me know. I will look into the logistics of it and post a follow up. I hate making assumptions but I feel like they are somewhat educated assumptions.
One more thing, once all of the carriers have a true data infrastructure in place most of these nagging problems will desist. Until then, the carriers have to be very careful how much of their bandwidth they allot to non proprietary functions. I hope you all understand why. IMO,
htj
Why is it that the SOMEBODIES in the mobile space are just passing NEOM by?? At the present, I think it is like an 18 wheeler (others) hitting a fly (NEOM) as it cruises down the road. They arent even slowing down and they arent scared at all. Question we all should be asking is why arent they scared??
+++
I used to have a saying that I told anyone who wanted to jump into the middle of a situation and "fix it".
1. Never, ever mess with Afghanistan. (Although, I have had to rethink that one)
2. Never, ever mess with Cambodia. (I still support that one)
3. And last, but not least... Never, ever get caught up in someone else's civil war. (That one I will never back down from)
Now, you guys/gals might thing that is a political statement, but it is far from it actually. It really means that until the process is finished/resolved, interference by a third party may get one attacked from either side even if one is foolish enough to think that sides have been taken. (even more foolish by thinking one knows where allegiances lie)
IMO, the reason that so many people are "sitting on the sidelines" is that NeoMedia is involved in what could be a landmark case where the litigant that comes out to be victorious could control the PWC bridge. Why are others continuing to develop products for the market without Neomedia's permission?
Because this is potentially a 30 Billion dollar market (with plenty of upside growth as time and technology permit) and anyone who wants to get involved needs to get in the market now, not later. Those who establish markets will likely keep them. Those who compete will always compete. The smart ones know that one of two things will happen.
1 Neomedia wins and they owe them money.
2 Scanbuy wins and they own no one money.
The market will develop with or without Neomedia. Again, IMO that is why Scanbuy didn't back down to Neomedia. Even though they might not think they are going to win, they will get tons of free publicity from the news wires about who they are, what they do, and how they do it. Even though they might lose, they will have a product when the case is settled. All of those companies that seem to be passing Neomedia by will have products when the case is settled. I know this sounds a bit arrogant on my part, but the EFF is providing Neomedia with a ton of publicity as well. Would we be on everyones radar if it weren't for Scanbuy and the EFF? Maybe not. Would we have a big target painted on us like we do now if it weren't for them? Maybe not. I personally think that the smart management is holding on to valuable dollars until they know where they are best spent. JMO,
htj
YJ,
Just out of curiosity. Did you send this to the CFO too? It might have ended up in the wrong hands.
Just a thought.
htj
Hey, I'm all for him posting his info.
In no way was I implying he should not post this stuff. It may be helpful for some.
I am just amazed at the amount of info there is and his ability to find it and post it day after day.
The only thing I personally want to see in writing now is a piece of paper on it describing a deal between NEOM and a major player in what ever part of this space makes the most sense for NEOM.
Simple. About as technical as I need to get.
___________________
Right then.
Now you know why I add the junkie name to my moniker. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I sincerely hope he is the one to post the deal you are looking for. It certainly would make my day, too.
In the mean time, if he's got time to find it, I will make time to read it.
Thanks, Banks. Have a great day.
htj
In4it
I must admit you are a tireless poster of anything even remotely associated with this space. Too bad none of this seems to matter as far as NEOM is concerned.
Banks
Banks/In4it
While it may seem irrelevant, I would rather see it than not see it. One never knows when an important piece of the puzzle may pass one by, especially if one never sees it. The space is converging and the players will soon meet in their own little virtual world. When and if there is a standardization on the rules, some of those players will have to conform to those rules if they want to continue to play. It is better to know about all of those seemingly unimportant players than it is to ignore them. They may turn out to be licensees. One never knows. JMO
htj
Just more more questions if I may , being that Europe is ahead of N/A, do the carriers in Europe have the same obstacles as our N/A carriers like bandwidth and 3.2meg phones not in then mass maket there?
Good question but I might start by saying that just because European wireless carriers are currently faster than US carriers, they are not necessarily ahead. When the Euro Cell network was being developed, the Government got involved and created the specifications for the network in order to gain compliancy. That meant that everyone would be able to use their phones anywhere in Europe. Great? Not so fast. By mandating a certain type of technology, upward mobility was all but lost. The infrastructure that is installed in Europe is a TDMA-based technology called GSM (Global System for Mobile). GSM uses a smaller channel size to squeeze even more voices into the same space with a virtually undetectable loss of quality. Even though the European nations are trying (with not so much success) to upgrade these systems, there is concern that the entire network may be obsoleted in the near future. They patched the network with a technology called W-CDMA which is working OK but it is not readily upgradable.
Qualcom has invested millions of Euros into CDMA network infrastructure in Europe with hopes that the 3G standard will prevail in the near future.
Now, back to the US and Japan. Remember what I said about Japan being a small country with an extremely high population density per square mile? That equates to low cost per person for upgrading infrastructure and they are way ahead of the US but not for long. Even though the US didn't standardize to a particular network protocol, its cell carriers function pretty well. Two of the major US carriers (Sprint and Verizon) started out with a Qualcom technology called CDMA. They have since upgraded to CDMA2000 which is within the current 3G standard (like Japan). AT%T will use EDGE technology to fuel the iPhone and its other phone base. So, while we are still not standardized on a particular network protocol, there is definitely improvements being made. I didn't mean to get off on a tangent there but I felt like you needed to know where the rest of the world is in the race to 3G. By the way China has decided to adopt the 3G standard (in addition to its own) as well.
Now, back to Europe. As the network capabilities grow, so will the demand for higher megapixel cameras. As with everywhere else, once the infrastructure supports it, carriers will offer higher resolution camera phones as part of their standard offering and not as just a luxury. One reason that South Korea and Japan seem to be so far ahead of the rest of the world is that their infrastructure supports the users needs. Until that happens everywhere else, carriers are going to be reluctant to offer higher bandwidth features. That doesn't mean it cannot be done, it just means that it cannot be done as fast as other carriers can do it.
Lastly, I cannot give exact statistics on the breakdown of VGA to over 1Mp cameras. Those statistics are available in industry reports but they are very expensive.
htj
your post have inspired to look into doing some more d.d
on what your where saying.. have a look at this link and curious on how this mobile phones compares to a gavitec universal reader.. or even a 3.2m vs the 1meg in this link.
http://www.3gvision.com/prod-bar.htm
I suspect this work in Japan and not N/A
diamondtech,
I have looked a bit further into this company. They do have a firm grasp of the technology and its potential. Their main market is Japan where their software is on dozens of handsets. Their software has an enhancement mode to clarify 1D codes. That is a good thing. However, looking at their system specifications, they too have similar roadblocks when it comes to image sensor resolution. In order to scan a code a macro setting or image enhancer (zoom or auto-focus) must be present in lieu of a high-resolution sensor. If a camera's focal area lies outside of those parameters then an inadequate image will be captured. Higher resolutions are definitely the preferred environment for capture.
From the 3g spec sheet for BK Reader
77,000 pixels 7-10cm (3.1-4.5in)
300,000 pixels (VGA) 15-20cm (7-9in)
1M pixels > 30cm approx. 14 inches (no need for macro mode)
The also are beginning to market their products in Europe and support 10 languages to date but they are completely absent from the US market. Could it be that their product would infringe on US patents if marketed here? My guess is yes.
One thing to remember about the Japanese market. They have a small country, large cities, and a large population density per square mile. They also are able to operate high speed networks with adequate bandwidth as the normal. These things are ideal for mobile marketing. They also have an affinity for owning the best when it comes to gadgets so the majority of their handsets meet the minimum requirements instead of a small percentage like the US. Think of Japan as the US in 2-3 years. By then we will have higher speed networks, higher resolution handsets and operating systems that support more than SMS as our normal. I already posted why this is so if you are curious, go back and read my last few posts. I know they read like stereo instructions but look for the keywords bandwidth, resolution/focus and infrastructure. Those are the related subjects.
htj
Gretsch,
No offense, but have you noticed that announcing a strategic partnership with Neomedia is akin to chumming the water. It tends to attract sharks.
I am ok with all of these SP's just making money and letting it show up on the 10Q and hearing about it in the CC. The lynch mob that follows Neomedia around doesn't seem to have a whole lot of compassion when it comes to companies that have a relationship with Neo.
Just an observation and IMO.
htj