“This story about the president of Qualcomm and a vice president of AT&T meeting Blaisure in a hotel room in Vegas, and either of them seeing working technology and thus agreeing to commit resources is preposterous.” That is the opinion of a board poster with a long history of antagonism toward anyone and everyone connected with MAXD, which is his prerogative. I’m sure he would admit that fact. But he was not there in the meeting so he would not know what happened. As soon as I saw the thumbs up to the poster on Yahoo, I knew it would appear over here as a response to a post which is hard for Halpern to reply to honestly. Apparently, my response to the post was intentionally ignored as it would have negated the point. Furthermore, the poster is denigrating the MAXD technology, which I guess is acceptable now that Halpern is on the outside looking in.
It would be convenient to discount the story as it is not flattering to Greg Halpern. Far from it. Better to jump on the bandwagon and claim that the story is fictitious. The meeting was set up by Qualcomm, not Blaisure. AT&T was already there for the CES show, as was Qualcomm. The meeting was in a corporate meeting room and not in a hotel room, as claimed. The VP of AT&T was impressed and wanted to go to the next step. Those are all facts. The next step does not mean committing funds or signing contracts, which I never stated. It means “we like what we hear, it has merit, it looks like it could be real, now prove it with the engineering.” That was enough for Vechery to commit the funding to continue.
Halpern was present for the meeting, so he knows what happened. Let me repeat that fact: Halpern attended the meeting. He saw and heard everything and would not be able to "honestly" dispute any of the facts I described from the meeting. Harvey Vechery was at the meeting, and I assume he would testify to the facts as well. Otherwise, why would he have committed another $250k of his own money after the meeting? For that matter, the $250k from Vechery is easily traceable, and the purpose for the funding was contingent on the results of the meeting. There is no getting around the facts. The meeting happened as described. The interest in the technology was real. The business deal didn’t materialize because Halpern didn’t pay the engineers with the money Harvey Vechery committed for that purpose. Those are the facts.
“No doubt this will continue to be one of the story Vechery repeats to try to trick more suckers into buying his MAXD shares.” This was another quote from the antagonistic board poster on Yahoo. Vechery wasn’t writing this “story,” I was. I have no contact with him. He is not my boss, he is not my stringer, nor is Vechery my editor. No one is pushing shares right now as the company is on the Expert Market and Halpern is no longer involved in fake stock pumping promotions. Should we get back to what happened to the $250k money and stop deflecting? Forensic accounting.
AI
