You can dream, but Barry has a long history of hidding and lying.

With ICTN,for years he did not release any financial statements at all, and had his herd of followers touting that it had revenues. Yet, the moment RLTR moved the offices out of the ICTN locale, he desperately started looking for some other form of revenue. Thus, ended with BCCI and ICTN merged into it.

Yeap, ICTN had revenues while Barry controlled RLTR: about 40K per month he was syphoning from the RLTR investors.

Now, BCCI will be the same thing. You can already see it at work. He is trying to push the price of the stock up by having his lackeys buy a few hundred shares here and there for a few pennies. They pay more in commissions that what he costs for the stock.

Again the game is on. He just can get around the idea of trying to convince more investor to buy the stock of his companies. Now, he think that he can create the perception of value with BCCI. But, I wouldn't bet on it.

If I were thinking of doing something with anoutfit of this nature, I would go about it differently. But, I won't say how that would be. I hate to give Barry any ideas.

Why all this discussion about Barry?

You've notice how his supporters have come out of the woodwork lately? This is nothing but an attempt by them to refurbish his image. I don't know if they are organized or not, but I am sure Barry talked to, at least, a couple of them on the phone lately. At least, one of them posted to have talked to our former CEO.

The purpose is very simple. They most rehabilitate Barry's image somewhat before there is a chance he can sneak back in as CEO of ReelTime through the back door.

Games of this nature is something Barry has always played. ICTN, BCCI, RLTR, the Airplane Co and MMA are the example we all know about. He came up with the idea of maybe coming back to ReelTime and doing a merging with BCCI. You may think I am speculating too much, but if you think about, you would realize that it fits the way he operates. Not only that, but I have heard rumors of his "I wonder if that could be possible". Thus, one thing leads to another, and before anybody realizes it, his lackies have come back to laud his virtues ... but don't be fooled.

The way we know this talk about his enteprenurial skills is nonsense is by looking at some facts.

Just look at the financial statements. By doing so you will see that, at least, about 3.5 million dollars were collected from investors. That's 1.7 cents per share. But, since the principals in the early days go some shares for practically nothing, and others were issued later likewise, one can determine that between 60 and 80 million were issued to "retail" investors for about 6 to 10 cents a share on the average.

From late 2004 to the end of 2008, Barry not only spent all that money, but also left the company with around 1.2 million i n unpaid bills (study the financial statements). In other words, he went through 4.7 million dollars in a llittle over 4 years or between 90 and 95 thousand per month.

Now, we know that in the earlier days he did not spend that much, but the records do show that in 2007 and 2008, there were months when he spent over 120 thousand.

Go back and figure out what his payroll would have been with the sizes of staff he had, what he paid for content when, things like insurance, etc, and you will see that, at least, 2 million went to other things. I suspect directly into his pocket in some instances, but more likely to payments to ICTN in the form or rentals and "professional services" rendered. In other words, he siphoned of, at least 2 million.

We know that of the 3.5 million invested by retail investors that BullBear put about 800 thousand. The biggest investor is probably Mark. I am sure he got some shares pretty cheap, but I don't see how he put less than a million into this, unless, of course, he got one of those lucky breaks at the beginning. But I doubt that break was that substantial.

Some Barry backers here claim that potentially large investors bacaked down on a number of ocassions, and that that was the reason why Mark took over--somebody's promise. But, I tell you that Mark wrestle the company away from Barry because Barry wouldn't play straight with the numbers and would pay for the audit. In desperation, mark made the moves to take over, and Barry reallydidn't put up a fight because was so deep in the ropes and was already contemplating other alternatives.

When Mark finally got a hold of the books, he realized that things were a lot worse than he expected. Barry had done a good job of concealment all along. All the potential legit investors backed down, and the retail investors stayed away from making direct investments. JG was the only party interested, and that was only because JG was crooked, and had no serious intention or backing.

And anyway, why would anybody invest 2 million when more than half of it would go out the window right away to pay old bills, and there were no assets. All mark has done is try to save the company that Barry ruined. If you do not believe this, and if you think Barry is a great entrepenuer, go put your money on BCCI. He his good at playing a great con a la Madoff. If you are in and out at the right time, you will do find. But if your are looking for an investment to make in a company that will be managed in a professional manner with the intention of providing long term value to its stockholders, forget bout having anything to do with any business Barry Henthorn runs.

It is a complete cynical undertaking and a complete disrespect for the truth to be blaming Mark for the problems at RLTR. You well know he went there in early 2008 to help Barry fix things, being that he was the biggest investor in the company. He was, in a way, like all the other investors here. But he was in a position where he could be of help. He went into it as a helper free of receiving compesation, and was very much a supporter of Barry. It took him months to start coming around and figure out what was really going on, specially due to Barry's unwillingness to be open about financial issues, including providing the information necessary to complete the audit.

You well know that everybody was pretty much disgusted with Barry by the end of 2008, except his lackies. You well know, Mark removed the assets of RLTR from the ICTN offices with the help of employees and some members of the board.

You well know a lot of things about how Barry destroyed the company, and how Mark found out there was no money at all 9and over a million in debt) when he got a hold of whatever papers he could.

You well know a lot of things--and even though you know the truth, you try to put the blame of Mark and absolve Barry.

You were the first one to use an expletives in a private e-mail you send to me out of your own volition. I believe on ten eyes for an eye. And you got back less than you deserved.

There is no greater disrespect that one person can show for another than to lie to them when one knows that the person being lied to knows that one is lying.

I have no need whatsoever to ever have anything to do with you again. In my private e-mail you have been placed in automatic disposal.

And, if you and other Barry supporters here, believe that the ReelTime model doesn't work, then go away. Go joing Barry at BCCI. Why are you and the other handful of Barry lovers wasting your time here. Anyway, you all, or most of you, claim not to have an investment here. So why bother?

Barry is not coming back through the backdoor of the company. Forget. And its a disgrace that a stockholder (refering to Mark) had to get personally involved, and leave behind his own business, to try to save this company, just to have those with little or no stake constantly attack him.

So you, and all the other Barry lovers, can just go away. He is now at BCCI, doing his dirty deeds as CEO of another company. Go join him there.

You can have opinions, but you cannot create your facts. The facts are the facts whether you like them or not. You can make all the sweeping statements you want, but if they are not based on facts, they are falsehoods.

Barry is gone from ReelTime, and he will stay gone. The attempt of some here to try to rehabilitate his image will fail. There is no reason to even try to do that unless some people are trying to start preparing the road for a comeback to ReelTime at some future point yet undetermined, if at all possible. Or, his lackies want to make sure that investors considering putting money on BCCI will not be scared away when they visit this message board.

Let's get the story right.

MF was one of the big investors. In 2008, he went to ReelTime to help out. The record clearaly shows that at that time he thought Bev and Michael were the problem. In time, he was convinced that Barry was the problem. We all know how this change in his opinion came about. It was based on facts: Barry was a spendrift and was fast and loose with the investors money, giving contracts to ICTN, which amounted to pilfering. When given the chance, he wrestle the company away from Barry, who let go of it without a fight because he knew the IRS and the SEC, if not also other government entities, would come looking for him. The court record shows this clearly.

He wanted to put time between himself and the government. Now that his fears have subsided, in part due to the JG mess, I have heard rumors that he will be interested in taking over the helm at RLTR again. But it will come to nothing. He should just stay with BCCI. I realize that RLTR was the best con he ever created, but he will have to be happy with BCCI. Period. We put our money in RLTR, and we intent to do everything possible to make a go of it.

When Barry left RLTR, the company was over one million dollars in debt. His own financial statements reveal it.

He had signed a contract with Sony that amounted to handing the content provider around 300K for nothing. Nothing: what else could you call a contract in which you get the right to show/rent, for 24 hours, about 1,000 movies for 3 or 4 dollars that can be bought at WalMart for 5 to 10 dollars, and which have been shown in cable and satellite hundreds of times? Is this the kind of man that anyone would want in charge of anything?

But we really know why he signed that deal. He didn't care about the company or the investors. He thought that the publicity generated by the deal would push the stock way up high. And then he could dump more shares in the open market, and line his pockets. And he was wrong about that too.

The same thing with all the other deals he signed. Jagran failed because he didn't have the money. When MF took over, he found out how the funds had been pilfered. He didn't have the money to close the deal.

In desperation, MF explored all the options. Things were so bad, he couldn't find anyone to invest. JG was the only taker. Too bad the man was a pathological liar.

Besides talking to some potential large investors, MF also tried to find money through the channels of the small stockholders, but hardly anybody went along with the deal.

Another thing that gets to me is how, now the Barry backers claim they got out a the right time and made money. But hardly anyone claimed at that time that they had gotten out.

The honest investors here are well aware of the whole con game. And we are not going to let the slick operators back in. If like some, you think that this model doesn't work, why waste your time. If like some, you think it is over with, then get out. But don't tell us that we have to close shop. We are not going to close shop. I bet that's what Barry is hoping for: that does in charge will give up so that he can get in through the back door and try to run another scam.

At this point in time, with all the accumulated evidence, there is absolutely no reason left to give Barry Henthorn the shadow of the doubt. He has been involved in numerous companies since the 1990s, and all of them have the qualities of being stock scam. ReelTime was definitely a good idea that, instead of properly managing it, he siphoned off money from the investors.

ICTN was based on a gimmick that allowed to by-pass long distance telephone charges until the big telecoms closed the loopholes. He was not even able to make that pay, but tdid a relatively good job of coniving investors.

Then, after the ReelTime idea was badly managed because he was looking to con investors instead of developing the product, he experimented with deal in airplane manufacturing and mixed marshall art, and finally, he moved into the barista deal, folding ICTN into it. ICTN, the great technology company was nothing more than a con job.

Maybe the barista company has merit in the business model just like RLTR, but if it does, he will siphon the money like he did RLTR.

I hope it is not too late for MF, Bev and MG to save the company. It is a great idea and they are the only honest leaders this company has ever had. Don't be fooled by any of the detractors that try to excuse Barry and who try to convince us that RLTR is a lost cause and that the current management is thoroughly incompetent. Some of these posters that think that are the same ones who have always stood by Barry, and who have liked anything and everything he does.

You have to wonder about their sense of reality if not their honesty. It is not possible for anyone to like all the ideas of an entrepenuer, and it is not possible for an entrepenuer to go through so many phases of development of companies if he/she is honest. Anyone who is always jumping from one thing to another, or who takes more than two years to get something of the ground cannot be trusted.

And anyone who continues to back such a person is likewise suspect.

WHO?

Who is the attorney friend of BH who is doing time for security laws violation?

Why were the techniques employed by ICTN that cause the company to get sued in the '90 by a major telecom, and why didn't Henthorn refuse to settle like so many of the other outfits that were sued? Could it be that he was the only that hadn't made money at it, and there was no point in anybody persuing the case?

How did RLTR manage to spend on the average over 100K per month during the years '06, '07 and '08 if they did not give ICTN millions of dollars in bogus contracts?

Why did Barry sign content contracts worth millions of dollars for the right to show a few thousand movies (for which he would be required to charge 3 or 4 buck rental overnight) that were available for 5 to 10 dollars at places like Walmart, and free of charge on cable and sat?

BullBear alone bought 800K worth of stock in '07.But how did the number of shares outstanding grow from 150mm to 200mm from a critical juncture in late '06 to early '08, when the stock generally traded in the market for nearly .10, while the company received practically no investment funds that shows on the record?

What were the deals he made with stock promoters to give RLTR good writeups?

How can one explain all the revisions in financial numbers during his tenure if all the information was always available? How many secret bank accounts did he open?

What happened with the checks received by him at the offices by investors who visited the place and were impressed by the surroundings?

Why, why, why? There are a thousand whys.

There is ICTN, RLTR, the airplane company, the mixed marshal arts company, and now BCCI. Is Barry's game a perpetual attempt to make money from investors with the creation of multiple companies? If it seems to be working, he will milk it? If it doesn't or quit working, he will dump it? Or just simply let someone else take over it.

Why are the same user names showing up as bulls all the time?

Barry destroyed a great idea with his insatiable greed that couldn't wait for the product to mature or take its course. He wanted the money now. Remember the blog entry with the words "the time is now"? What greter prove do you want that he was nothing more than a stock promoter? It is very self evident now.

No, we don't want Barry now under any circumstances. Even if the idea of the baristas has merits, and it takes off, it is not likely to produce a return fast enough to satisfy Barry. He just can't wait. No, we don't want Barry now. This is a great idea and it deserves a good team. If the team we now have can't turn this thing around, let it die.

When it becomes available to sell, I take a quarter for my shares.

Ha, ha, ha. What a joke. My portfolios and those of others I know, still show ICTN, so, I couldn't put my shares for sale.

This is a con. Don't buy into it. Barry Henthorn is a con artist. Stay away.

There is no point in discussing these issues if you simply refuse to admit the factual issues.

If you have looked and made copies of the financial statements that were made at different times and then deleted from Pink Sheets, you would know that most of what you are saying is factually not true. Neither the removed financial statements nor the ones currently available in Pink Sheets back up what you are saying.

By any calculation, ReelTime received well in excess of 3 million dollars in investor financing. The money was pilfered. Period. There is no way a business of this magnitude went through this money. The funds were simply funneled to ICTN. It was definitely unethical if not illegal.

ICTN has not reported in years. It is a conjob. No matter how cheap they got the space, it was not acquired a cheap as you insinuate.

We know from back in 2007, if not 2006, that BH was having potential investor visit ReelTime and talk them into investing. There are numerous instances of these visit that were recorded herein on in private e-mails at a time no one really suspected he was a crook.

ICTN was sued in the late '90s. Anyone who has been around for a while should remember such a thing. So, I am not going to waste my time going back to find the links. We should be past the point of having to remind each other of these things.

The only reason why there could have been so much discrepancies between financial reports, including the removed ones is deceit. I suspect that BH opened numerous bank accounts in the name of ReelTime, ICTN and possibly other corporations, in his name or those of others, and moved funds around to hide his real activities from the bookkeeper. Nothing else makes sense. There is no other way of accounting for the discrepancies.

Also, what is the name of that attorney with whom BH had a long standing business relationship who is now doing time for securities fraud? I am sure you know.

And last, but not least, the Sony deal is the kind of deal only a total idiot or a person with ulterior motives would make. Iamgine, willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to show less than 1,000 movies at either 3 or 4 dollars for 24 hours rental--movies that can be bought in places like WalMart for 5 to 10, or watch free of charge through cable or sat. You have to be a super idiot to sign such a deal.

But the blog Barry wrote at that time saying "the time is now" readily shows that he did it as an attempt to boost investor interset so that he could raise money. He had no interest otherwise, and was actually willing to burn the stockholders at the time in order for a quick crap shoot.

He is a crook, a crook a thousand times. A good enough crook to fool you, and obviously a better crook that JG, who cannot fool you.

I don't understand why you refuse to see that Barry was the real problem. He played fast and loose with the stockholders moneyto the point of criminal negligence. Can it be proven in a court of law? I don't know, but he certainly did.

Just let me point to a few things:

In 2007, he put out a financial statement in which he clearly stated as a separate line under liabilities a payroll tax owed of 38,000. For a company the sizes of ReelTime that is roughly equivalent to one full quarter in arrears or a little bit more.

The Feds, state and Unemployment have taken legal action against the company for taxes not paid for 06. 07 and 08. That is in record, and the links were provided here a long time back.

After his initial admission of taxes owed, he revised the finacial statement, removing the old statement and replacing it with numbers that didn't match in practicallyl any way the priorly released numbers.

This is absolutely an act of deception. All software packages can readily adjust, and was numbers are in, they are in. There is no reason for the numbers to change the way they did. You know about software, and you know that the records remain unchange unless one changes them. But if one writes a check for a certain amount, that is permanent.

Everything that ReelTime was doing could be done with off-the-shelf software. I know three fellows running a company that has more than 50K items they sell, and they run it all with off-the-shelf software, and can tell you at any time who bought what when and how much they paid for it. No revisions in the numbers are necessary six month, a year down the line.

What happened in ReelTime is that Barry had multiple bank account, and was aggressively moving fundsd from one place to another to hide his criminal behavior. He was funding ICTN with the RLTR investors money. didn't even have the presence of mind to run his scam from an out of the way location, but had to pilfer the resources by having a plush office in mid-town.

Not only that, but he signed deals with content providers that were, at best, extremely naive, and at worst part of his dedicated con. Maybe he thought that being able to announce a deal with Sony would bring him lots of money from new investors, or maybe he was plain stupid.

I want to know how many bank accounts he opened for ReelTime, and I would like to know if he has release control thereof to the new management. MF made a lot of mistakes, but at least he is honest.

All I know is "THE TIME IS NOW"!!!!

But considering all the time you have been here, you should know a lot more. And this lack of knowledge is the reason why you write some of the things you write.

As for Asus, he has a lot of wrong information pertaining to the role Barry has played in this company. The man was fast and loose with the investors money, and wasn't concerned with the issue because he was counting the chickens even beore the hens laid them.

The history of what went wrong with ReelTime is well documented here, and backed by a lot of information burried in links or told by the posters otherwise where to find it. There are court documents, etc available on the net for those who want to view them. Go search for all these things and you will not what happened.

Almost all of you should have been doing your research from way back, and now you either don't want to know the truth that has been laid baer day by day, or are simply (and have been all along) to lazy to look it up and read it.

It is really upsetting when posters go blaming Bev, MG and MF because they failed to do their research. When Barry let Mark F. walk away with the company is because he could no longer hide the lies, and because there was little left to plunder. Now some people want to blame the three persons trying to save the company, which, in my opinion, is not worth saving.

As I have told Mark more than once, if I had the money and I wanted to invest in an outfit like this one, I would not put my money here based on the information I know, but I would start from scratch. I would, however, strongly would consider the three of them as the persons on whom I would put my trust to do the job. On the otehr had, we all know that all three of them still think that there is a chance to salvage this company. I am sure that they are aware of a lot of details that none of us know, so I defer to tham on this matter, and will await for a pronouncement a few months down the road.

I put all the blame for the failure on Barry. JG was a con artist, but he was the con artist who preyed on the company under desperate a situation. Had Mark had another alternative that looked viable to him, he would not have gone with JG. AND THE SITUATION THAT LED TO THE DESPERATE MOVE WAS CREATED BY BARRY.

Yeap, I was about to tell him not to mess with MY TEAM.

This is so funny.

As far as MF is concerned, he had so many options, and he didn't know how to pursue them. I told him to increae the number of shares and to sell them in the open market, but he didn't want to do that because it would dilute. Yet, he turned around and gave them to JG. I don't get it. I will never understand his thinking. Had he done what I suggested, he would have raised over one million dollars since he took over. It didn't do any good to give him alternatives. Somehow he turns out to be one of those investors that makes the wrong choices again and again. In my years, I have run into my share of business people, some very nice persons, that are incapable of making the right decision.

Sometimes I think that I should have taken a quick trip to Seattle, and try to knock some sense into their heads. Now the hole is even deeper, but the option remains the same. I like the option of raisin money from a lot of different sources that the one of finding an angel investor.

DEMANDS! DEMANDS! DEMANDS!

Your: "EXCUSES! EXCUSES!" tickles me. I am sure BZ and MG get a kick out of demands.

When investors complained about BH and JG, their words were falling of wicked ears, and were, in a peculiar sense just as good as deaf. In other words, they put out PRs, etc to apeace the disheartened investor.

And, in other words, they understand very well that some, if not most, investors will be, at least temporarily, happy with a massage of their brains than with profits.

Well, investors here can scream and holler until they are blue in the face, but BZ and MG don't play that kind of game as far as I know. Get use to the idea. If you hold your breath waiting for them to comply with your wishes, your brain cells may die due to lack of oxygen.

I bet they get a chuckle about the unhappy investors making demands from them. These are the same investors that gave prior CEOs more rope than there is on earth, and now don't want to give the new team more than a couple of inches with which to tie a knot. AMAZING!

When BZ and MG took over, they did not go back to square one. They went back to square minus ten. BH and JG not only stopped the bus on the road side; they put it off the road into the ravine, and you want it running down the highway before the tow truck has figured out how to hook the vehicle to the chain. Ha, ha, ha. This is very funny.

As I was told many times before: if you are not happy, you can sell and carry the loss forward.

It is possible. They have had conflicts before. I don't think MF really understand all the ramifications of this business. He is a very friendly and honest person, but that doesn't mean he has a grasp of what is going on.

It took him a long time to figure out that BH's approach wasn't going to work, and his making a deal with JG the way he did doesn't say much for his business savvy. The financial situation of ReelTime is pretty bad now, and I don't get a feeling that he is the right person to fix this, if anybody is.

I hope they can work through whatever the problems are. From the day BZ took over, I give them six months to get the house in some sort of order and make a report to stockholders. That's less time than I gave JG to fix things up before I started complaining, but I think it should be enough time to report to the stockholders although not enough to get things straighten out and start moving forward.

It seems like Asus is the only one here who understands what is going on.

No, it is not to me. it is to Barry Henthorn. Some here either have faulty memories or selective amnesia. Let me remind you that it was Barry the one who fired MG in late 2007 because Michael inisted that a monetary allocation had to be set aside in the budget for marketing, and that it was Bev who got fired in early '08 because she clashed with Barry about the contracts. He gave a deal to Sony to which Bev was completely opposed, and that is what got her fired.

She was a President in name only. She had no power, and that was Barry's doing. In many companies, presidents have no power. There are CEOs, boards, COOs and CFOs all above the president.

I had a job a few years back, which I lost for butting heads with management, and I was considered management. A one hundred years old business went under five years after I left, and they have all kinds of problems with unpaid taxes, etc. Bev was a powerless title-holder.

Remember, when Bev left and MF came on board, they were not in good terms. Bev and MG hardly spoke to MF. With the passing of time, MF had a falling out with BH, and he and the other board members took over the company.

Anf or those who don't know or don't recollect, there were three parties interested in investing in ReelTime after MF took over. Two of these parties ended up backing out, and MF was left with JG or trying to get money from a variety of sources. Practically no ne who has been here since he took over invested when the company needed money. Instead of buying shares directly from the company, they went in the market to buy more shares, which doesn't do any good for the company balance sheet. He was basically left with two choice: JG who lied about the money and Bev, who didn't have the money to put into.

So, where have we ended: with Bev running the company. Even if you don't care for Bev and Michael, they have MF full support.

And how long has it been since Bev took over? Two months. And you are already making demands. I wish you all had treated Barry and James like that. Shame!

When James had been in charge for six months, I started giving him a hard time for making promises he didn't keep. he kept no promises. And you all were telling me that he needed more time. Heck, he spent more time postponing the launch that how long Bev has been in charge--and she probably has, as Asus says, a lot of legal issues that prevent her from giving an update.

Why did you all gave James all those breaks by saying he inherited a mess, but won't give the same breaks to Bev. Why? Why? Why? We all gave James more than six months, and he took us down the wrong road. And you complained about me giving him a hard time after sixz months. Yet, you are unwilling to give Bev even a couple of months.

The CEO communicates with the investors when there is something to communicate; not when the investors what to hear some words.

Yeap, I bought some Blockbusters at a shade over thirty cents.

I consider my investment here a lost cause. Between BH and JG, this company has been brought down to its knees. Now, some people want to give Bev and MG a hard time, but where were these investors when prior management was screwing things up? The two clowns left a big mess for current management to fix, if it is possible to fix.

We have a lot of investors here who want to blame the tow truck driver for the accident.

For those askeing for a bone to be tossed: forget it.

Bev and MG will not toss bones. That is a practice of a crooked CEO.

When BH was in charge, many of you gave him chance after chance after chance. When GJ took over, you did the same. Even in the face of the fiasco that was brewing, you still gave him chance after chance after chance, and bought into most of the mess he made.

Now Bev and Michael have to fix the mess left behind by these two former CEOs, but you don't want to give him any leaway.

You will here nothing for at least three more months. I would be surprise if there is anything worth reporting by summer. I wouldn't be surprise if we don't hear anything until next year.

True to a point, and I agree on the culture. But while they are unwillling to pay 2.99 or 3.99 for a 24 hour window to watch, they would be willing to pay .25, .50, .75, 1.00, 1.25, 1.50, 1.75 and 2.00 for a 100 hours window to watch.

Why would anyone pay 2.99 to stream a movie that one can buy at Wal-Mart for 10-12 dollars, at the flea market for 5, or watch on cable or setellite as part of the package. It is absurd.

The only way this business model will work is with much lower prices that we were offering and a payment to the content provided based strictly on a percentage of the rental. Anything else is a loss-loss for the likes of ReelTime and non-revenue producing for the content provider.

The only way the free-on-the-internet culture is changed is by making prices so cheap initially that people will make a habit of paying.

That has to be the case all over the place. Even here, for example, IHUB is way to expensive in the mind of most people even if they had no problem with their policies.

Are we going to make a habit of agreeing with each other?

Yeap, people care, and many did small things without compensation. A friend of mine who develops websites for a living spoke on the telephone with Rhustang on several occasions while he viewed the ReelTime website. He did it as a favor to me and never invested. Yeap, a lot of people did small things to help out. In all my years as an investor, I have never seen another company in which the rank-and-file investor has been so involved.

But to me, the real failure is not really within the company even though I have a poor opinion of BH. The real failure is in not having worked out the business model properly and not having had enough resources.

No need to go into the details of what I see wrong. I have written about it here in numerous occasion. My concept of the business model has never really been tried. And I thought that BH and company had in mind something very similar to what I had in mind. But I came to the conclusion that the differences between his idea and mine are rather substantial.

As in sports, the success or failure of a business plan can be measures in inches. And the overall package is no stronger than the weakest links.

One hundred percent in agreement.

The worst part of the whole mess, however, is the lack of trust created in the industry for ReelTime and other outfits like it. Imagine, all those copies of movies out there, with nobody but a few people knowing where these are--if anybody.

Hopefully, they are in a safe place somewhere. I wonder what outfits like Sony think? Where are those master digital copies that we gave ReelTime? Are these about to his the pirating market?

Not only have prior management create a business climate in which ReelTime cannot be trusted, but prior management has create a climate in which no small outfits can be trusted.

Thus, maybe content providers will only deal with big players from now on. But that would be a mistake since putting all the eggs in one basket would make an outfit like Netflix a bully like WalMart that can get product providers to give them specially low prices.

That would be a mistake for the content providers. They need to have a half dozen strong competitors out there--small viable outfits. The content providers cannot depend ontheir own websites since that would mean they will be carrying only their products, and customers for the most part, would want a warehouse type of place where they can watch everything.

An alternative would be for content providers to buy an equity position into some small outfits, and put some of its people on the Board of Directors. But will other content providers put their product on a website where their competitors have a stake? I would think that maybe several content providerrs could have an equity position in several outfits.

For example, if Sony, Disney and Lionsgate all invested two million each on ReelTime, it could succeed. Of course, it doesn't have to be ReelTime. It could be a completely new outfit in which they all go in as partners. They could put into a certain amount of capital and then sell additional shares in the open market through a IPO, and in no time, a top of the line website could be in operation.

I am going to stop here.

You werre complaining about those of us who complained after months or years of prior management not achieving a thing. Now you don't even want to give the new team a chance to make it work. You wanted prior management to tell you thing, but didn't care if it was lies as long as they told you something. Now you want current management to follow the same kind of policy, which is, at the very least, unethical. They are actually, for a change, doing the right thing: keeping their mouths shut until they have something to report and to it through recognized channels.

And, by the way, they are not responsible for the mistakes of the past. Don't blame Bev and MG for the things that BH and JG did. They were not in charge. They got booted out for trying to make management do the right thing.

Why weren't you a complainer when there was a reason to do so; when there was still a chance of putting some pressure in the old managements to do the right things.

You are not going to hear anything until summer. So, you might as well forget it. I doubt that they can bring this back to life, but it wouldn't have been their fault.

I never expected we would agree, but you are correct about adult onctent for Ethostream. It was mentioned to me by numerous parties in private phone conversations, e-mails, and it was posted here and on the Asus Board by direct quote from JG indicating that he was the one who pulled the plug. We would now be generating revenues there has it not been for JG.

As far as the business model is concerned. I originally bought with a certain idea in mind, and I thought my idea was more or less what was going to be done. It has never been tried. BH got close, but there were certain things absolutely wrong with what he was doing. I won't dicuss them here now since they have been discussed in many occasions in the past.

You are incorrect. It is obvious you do not understand. While Bev and Michael have a long history with this compan, they have never been in charge until recently. Remember that both their relationships with BH and JG ended up in turmoil, and may actually be in court now. We don't know for certai.

Six months after JG took over, he had missed several deadlines and most everybody here was giving him more time, although he made a habit of communicating when there really wasn't anything of substance to say.

Now Bev and MG have taken over, and not thrity days have passed and some are already expecting answers. Well, forget it. They are not the types to sooth the ego of impatient stockholders that post here. Whatever BH and JG did have nothing to do with what Bev and MG are up to now. In fact, they have an even bigger mess to clean up than what BH left JG, who did nothing but create an even bigger mess.

And for all we know, JG is suing as he threatened to do right in these board. And what happened to all the servers, content, etc? Heck, we don't know. Don't expect to hear one word until well into the summer. They are not going to toss a bone. They are not bone tosser. Their objective is to get everything ready, and then make a big announcement for everybody.

You should do like I have. I consider my investment lost due to BH and JG. And, I am backing Bev and MG all the way as our last hope, and from my point of view, they have six months from the day they took over to get back to us.

I will vote against it. I would vote for a one-for-two, and that is it.

Some posters here have recently expressed the opinion that the ReelTime business model is not viable. I disagree with that.

First, at this juncture, we do not know exactly what the business model will be now that we have new management. The model can be offered in numerous fashions with a large variety of ramifications. Some of these particulars are unlikely to sustain a business; however, others will work, and do so very well. So the real issue is: how is the business model of PPV VOD developed in a viable fashion?

I do have my ideas of how this needs to be done in order to be profitable. I have had the same basic ideas pertaining to the medium since I first invested here, and I have seen no reason to change my basic outlook. I have added a few ramifications in my six years as a ReelTime stockholder, but my construct have remained the same.

I have discussed this construct in here before, but I think it is in line to point out some of my ideas again.

First, I believe in a simple home page. I like the version on the right side of the page in Facebook. The only changes I would make are a few additions on the bottom of the page, which I shall now mention.

These additions include:
1.) A link to the catalog page, where the viewer will find hundreds of categories and subcategories, under which one will be able to find all the units of content. Some units of content could be found under more than one category.

2.) A link to live programming, where a calendar of events will show up.

3.) A link to “The Mall” or “The stores.” There will be stores that sell DVDs and Blu-ray, and there could also be stores selling music, e-games, software, e-books, and maybe books and table games, etc. But one would start with a limited Mall.

ReelTime could take care of The Mall by itself or it could rent spaces to other dealers. I prefer the first way myself.

4.) There should also be smaller links to an entertainment encyclopedia, an e-newspaper about the industry, a bulletin board, and access to a tabulation of customer “grading” of films (all units of content).

My grading system would be from 10 to 0, but I do not think this is a must. I should be able to go to that page and see the average grade of a movie, the number of times it has been watched and the number of times it has been graded.

Second, I am very concerned about the pricing scheme. I believe that prices should be at intervals of .25 (I used to think interval of .50).
The owner of the content should decide the price and the split on any rentals should be 60/40 to their favor. But there would be no base fee. They cannot have a base fee, choose the price and get a percentage. They could price the content so high that it will not sell, and we would be stuck with the fee. So, I absolutely disapprove of the fee base.

The owner of the content would be able to change the price every quarter. They can raise it; they can lower it; they can discontinue the particular unit.

Third, there would be interactive facets to the website: discussion boards as mentioned above, and in other fashions. Each unit of content will have its own discussion board. Each article written for the newspaper will have its own discussion board, etc.

There would also be some free content. In the home page, there should be three lines of movies below the Headlined ones. These would be:

We recommend.
Trailers of “Up and Coming”.
Free content.

There can be other ramifications, but these I consider to be the basics for success.

If it is done this way, I think it will be successful. But, if these parameters are ignored, I don’t think the model will be profitable.

I have most of my shares from well before the time you became a member of the Board. Purchsed my first batch in 2004. I bought just a few more back before the days of JG, and that is the end of my purchasing. I don't believe that the model itself is broken although ReelTime itself might be. For me, there hasn't been a point for selling for a long time since my shares are really worthless. If something doesn't happen soon, I will sell whenever I have a profit elsewhere. Like you, I have basically given up on this company. However, I still believe that if done right this would work.

As far as I can tell, MG and Bev are pretty much by the book. They are going to avoid appearing improper, and thus, I will do not expect them to talk on the phone with anybody, and if they do, they will not say anything that even hints at giving out sensitive information. They are pretty straight and narrow when it comes to that.

As for e-mails, they will exhange some. They have with me. But they have said absolutely nothing beyond: "I thank you for your suggestions. We are always happy to hear from our stockholders. We will make a public announcement at the right time."

If anyone here tells you that they got some special tipbit of information, don't believe the poster. The same with MG. None of them will release any information to individual investors. Just wait. There is no reason why we should hear anything at all before some time this summer. I cannot imagine that they could work that fast. I also do not expect them to put up a partial website just so that we here have something to look at, and run our finger through the key board. Just have some patience.

One of the recommendations I made to MG in an e-mail is to have on the homepage a link to "Live Programming". That would lead to a calendar page, where the programs to be viewed live would be listed by day and time. It matters not if it is a rock concert, classical concert, sports event, political speech or anything else.

I like to thank BZ and MG for taking over the management of ReelTime. Regardless of all the problems left behind by the prior administrations, this is the most optimistic I have felt about the company in a long time.

I like to thank MF for having the inner strenght to stand up to JG and make the current transition possible.

I like to thank Asus for all that he has done to bring about the changes now taking place even if it amounts to nothing more than the morale boost that he provided me and other unhappy investors, as well as, the morale boost that he might have provided our current management team.

And I like to thank all the investors here who backed the campaign to remove JG from the CEO position. I do not know if the fight with JG is over. But I am here ready to provide any assitance I can to the current management team in keeping JG out of the company and in helping them make ReelTime a viable enterprise.

My thanks again to all.

I welcome Truck King. He is a fair minded individual.

I send Michael an e-mail making my suggestions. He thanked me, but said nothing else.

Now, we might finally move forward.

Brick and mortar store will continue to exist. They will change in nature like music stores and book stores, but they will be around.

I see a future in which brick and mortar store will include a coffee shop. It will sell not only e-games, but music and e-books, as well as, more traditional items, such as printed books, posters and other paraphrenalia. In the brick and mortar stores, the customer will be able to rent or buy, and may order the physical item on line or pay for the streaming in the store and then watch it at home. This would be rare but it will happen as a matter of "impulse buying". The customer may attend a talk in the store, and then decide on the spot to watch a movie when he gets home. Also, some stores may have one or more small "theater" sections or booth. One may have to pay to view a movie there, or it might be provided as an insentive. The customer may, then, buy the movie or rent it there, or decide to finish viewing it when he gets home by streaming it. Or they may just watch it at the store while having some food and drink. In a way, it will turn out to be sort of like a sports bar.

In other words, the brick and mortar store of the future in this venue will be a center where reproductive arts are "consumed" by the customer in a wide variety of ways. And they will be more than anything the kind of places where afficionados will gather, and to the business it will serve the role of promoting the company, which will be, more than anything else, an internet business.

Except in some rare occasions, these kinds of businesses will be likely more successful at a local level. A well plan structure will start with a local base, and only expand later. Models imitating the likes of Netflix will have a hard time getting of the ground. Thus, the niche has to be a local appeal.

I like the homepage that shows up in Facebook, or the other one before the Green homepage. But not the first two. In other words, the third or fourth homepages, if I have the number right. Either one is fine with me.

I would, however, make some adjustments. The three lines of films or four or five, would carry on top, in large letters, the words FEATURES FILMS. Underneath, each line would have its own heading, in smaller letters than the above:

RECENT RELEASES

WE RECOMMEND

CUSTOMER FAVORITES.

On one side or on the bottom of the page, there would be some prominent links:

CATALOG, after one clicks on it, it would take one to a page where one would see hundreds of categories and sub-categories links. These would take us to the category or sub-category where the individual items of content are listed.

LIVE PROGRAMMIG, after one clicks on it, it would take one to a calendar with dates and programs

STORES, which would allow the visitor to visit the stores. This would be a box with smaller boxes inside. These smaller boxes would say:

VIDEOS

MUSIC

E-GAMES

E-BOOKS

and bellow it will say: "... more stores".

By clicking on each of the top ones, one would go to that particular store. By clicking on the "more stores", one would go to a page with the list of all the stores.

At the beginning, we might start by selling only videos, or maybe videos and music, and gradually expand. We could sell, both, new and used.

The message left by Green on this board that was deleted entailed nothing more than a very long series of quotes on the political opinions expressed by MG on the ASUS board. It (the post) had absolutely nothing to do with the RLTR board except for the fact that the writer (MG) of these posts in the ASUS board happens to be now (not at the time the posts were written) a member of the Board of Directors of ReelTime.

The Green post clearly shows that JG is an IHUB junkie, and has been so for a long time. I now clearly understand that when JG was CEO of ReelTime, one of his primary tasks was to spend several hours every day cruising through IHUB and other similar place--such as Yahoo--to read and post about ReelTime. He clearly appears to be one of those Zwebner-like characters that tries to make a living as a fraudalent stock promoter. Makes BH look like a saint.

From the litigation angle: We are in a worse place now than ever before because, on top of whatever was there before, we have to deal with the legal action, or at least the threat thereof, by JG. Only time will tell if he is going to do something. And he can wait two years to take action. How would this matter be resolve before hand? Before it can get there? I don't know.

We are also worse of because the issues continue to be unresolved. One wants to put these aside before the day in court arrives. But that requires money.

As for dilution, I don't like the idea either. But, with one million in debt, no money in the back, no revenue stream, no operational website, how are we going to take care of anything without raising capital? And how is one going to raise capital at this juncture except through selling shares of stock to hundreds, if not thousands, of investors willing to gamble with a little bit of money? At current stock prices, we would have to sell about 250 million shares to pay the debt.

I suspect the website looks as it does right now because they do not even have the money to move the servers to another location. I would think, they are right now working constantly to try to figure out how to take the website live again.

I give them sometime until next month to communicate their intentions and do something with the website.

Our investment is gone. The company could still be saved.

Gee, Green had ten months! And you are complaining about Bev, MG and MF after two weeks! LOL

No buyout. I think that is wishfull thinking on the part of some. There is no real reason to believe that a buyout is in the works. And I hope there isn't because long term it will be better that way.

SIRI is more than a satrad business. It provides weather, traffic, data and backseat TV, and it will end up providing a lot of other services to hundreds of millions of customers around the world directly or through other businesses that rent infrastructure from them.

It is my opinion that SIRI will have 30 to 50 satellites and thousands of repeaters by 2020, and that these will be used in ways we do not even think about nowadays. Young people that invest here now have a very good chance of seeing their investment grow over one hundred fold over the next ten years.

Yes.But that is at least a couple of years in the future

This has nothing to do with knocking myself out--absolutely nothing.

This has all to do with a proper and honest understanding of the situation at ReelTime. You are not even interested in the present; much less the past, and therefore cannot grasp the future.

ReelTime doesn't exist in a vacuum. Its future will be the product of how management deals with the present, and the present is rooted in the past. To understand what needs to be done to save this company, one has to understand where one is and how one got here, and all the factor that have to be handled in order to move forward. Hiding from the truth is not an answer.

This very attitude of not wanting to know is mostly responsible, in many respects, for the failure thus far. Investors here did not consider the nature of BH's character when the need to do so was due. MF failed to properly assess JG's value to the company by not carefully looking into his past. You will want current management and investors to do the same now by not looking at where we really stand as a business.

JG was (and maybe is/will be again, whatever) the prototypical CEO that hides information from investors. He depends on investors who want to be no-nothings/dreamers for his cuccess.

The best thing we can do here to help Bev, MG and MF move this company forward is to have a realistic assessment of the situation. As little as a month ago there were people here telling us that JG had not ahd enough time to fix the problems left behind by BH. In other words, they were saying that nine months as not enough. but now, on top of the mess left behind by BH, we have the even bigger mess left behind by JG. So, how long is it going to take to fix this mess? I will be happy if at this juncture it can be fixed by the end of this year.

However, with out the understanding of all the ramifications of how we got here, an investor cannot understand why this is the case. You certainly do not understand, do not care to know or want anybody else to know. I wonder why?

And all this "knock your self out" kind of stuff aimed at me as if the issue were one of my personal feelings instead of the company is utterly without merit, and something so superficial in nature that everybody here, except the most intellectually dense, should be highly displeased with your usage thereof as a means of forestalling honest debate.

This is not about the past; this is about the present. My question to you is: why are you so interested in shutting down debate? Why is it that you do not want investors to be informed?

Your statement that I am dragging down the price of the stock by posting relevant information reminds me of the way Florida argued his points. Also the point about childishness sounds pretty childish. Who are you anyway? You appeared here recently, and as such, I would suspect that you would be asking questions and wanting to be informed. However, you are doing the complete opposite. You want people to stop discussing relevant information. Then, you say things as if you had been around for a long time. Kind of intriguing.

I will not stop discussing pertinent and relevant information just because you want to shut off debate. You do not control the debate here, and most poster here want to read different perspectives; not be kept in the dark.

So, you are wasting your time.

If you want to express a difference in viewpoint, do so. But do not expect to stop the debate.