IAM4, you say: "For the record, I don't think there is a negative implication in the fact that BIO-key OEMs ID Director for Windows."
Yet this de facto assertion itself is a negative, and a few days ago you explicitly cast doubt on BIO-key's gross margins on ID Director: "Does BKYI profit significantly on ID Director for Windows as an OEM of OmniPass, or is there a profit-share that favors the OEM?"
Certainly it is a negative if BIO-key loses the lion's share to an OEM.
Apparently the only evidence you can provide indicating ID Director is Omnipass (or as of your last post, it is now one of TWO different OEM products), is because you don't think that BIO-key has the necessary expertise. You say:
"It's a totally different technology that integrate with Windows clients and Active Directory, than it is to perform large-scale fingerprint identification. So, leave the experts in the respective fields to partner with each other...Both are excellent products. My point was that BIO-key has to pay for them, since they didn't develop the products themselves. They buy a license, and they sell a license. Whatever profit they make, is good for BKYI. But it's a bit misleading to make statements that encourage investors to think that BIO-key developed ID Director for Windows. They didn't write a single line of code."
Yet you have provided ZERO evidence of this. If BIO-key was licensing this product, it would be a material fact and would have to be stated or publicly announced somewhere. Actually, all that ID Director for Windows is, is simply WEB-key with an Active Directory component. Microsoft provides the tools for any moderately skilled programmer to develop such an integrated component. Now maybe what's confusing you is that there's ID Director for Windows, ID Director for Allscripts (https://allscriptsstore.cloud.prod.iapps.com/applications/id-13010/ID_Director), for Epic, etc. It's a port of BIO-key's API into a particular venue. Also, you may be confused because in 2011 BIO-key did integrate their matching algorithm into Softex for a telecom company (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1019034/000143774912003884/ex99-1.htm):
"Launched a new program with OEM partner Softex to integrate BIO-key algorithm within Softex software to provide fingerprint sign on and authentication for 10,000 retail employees of a major wireless telecommunications company."
But this had nothing to do with ID Director. In fact, BIO-key was already selling the ID Director product or a version of this product at the time of that Softex bullet in their docs:
2011: "BIO-key's Positive ID Director, is powered by BIO-key's award winning software. In addition to Nationwide Children's Hospital, BIO-key software is utilized by leading hospitals, blood banks, EMR & EHR providers and healthcare facilities throughout the United States and by commercial enterprise and government agencies across the globe."
"The adaptive biometric indexing technology covered by this patent is utilized today in BIO-key’s core Vector Segment Technology (“VST”) biometric algorithm and is integrated into the Company’s WEB-key and ID Director suite of solutions." [Emphasis added.]
All this adds up to the fact that the situation is in fact reversed, that you are the one misleading investors.
Finally, you declare the mobile trend is facial, while I believe we will begin to see underglass fingerprint readers in the mobile market, sooner rather than later. Samsung 10S release date is a few weeks away. But I find it interesting that this was posted just a couple hours ago:
"According to online murmurs, Samsung's 10th-anniversary smartphone lineup will comprise of the Galaxy S10, S10+ and S10e. The higher-spec models, rumours suggest, could be the first to adopt Samsung's Infinity-O display, an in-display fingerprint scanner and a triple-camera..."
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
