Sentinel:
I haven't ever "contended" anything about who is at "fault" for the Eclipse unit now coming out in the time frames repeatedly announced and then extended by e.Digital.
My point is that e.Digital has a well-known, time-proven pattern of announcing expected shipping dates that are virtually never met. IMO, they make announcements and create expectations without factual back-up and then hide behind a disclaimer of having used forward-looking language.
This was a very small project that generated either $15,000 or $30,000 in NRE fees (the 10K and 10Q are inconsistent) yet has gone on for over a year and a half. Since e.Digital is going to oversee the manufacturing they would know when the product is going to be shipped, yet they consistently create the expectation of imminent shipping even though the units were not yet in production. IMO, they should not give out an expected shipping date until these items are in production.
They do this ALL the time and people like you defend them by saying it's out of their control. That may be the case, but then they should not be announcing expected shipping dates and leave it up to the company that is in control to make those announcements.
It would seem a lot more objective if people would at least admit the abysmal track record of giving guidance that turns out to be false on things like shipping dates, product launches, revenue, margins, etc. As long as shareholders defend them when their guidance is false, they will continue to do it.
Market Data 
Markets 
