Reply:
Thanks a lot for bringing on the DD but I miss your point.
Q. You imply that Spooztools would be the ideal program to work with concerning this issue?
A. Please review the Symbology effort requirements and the Spooz software. If there are any shortcomings with the Spooz software, I'm not aware of any.
If I'm wrong, kindly correct me. Notice the testing program requirements on option trading, etc?
Q. Correct me if I'm wrong but the deal already fell through so there is no "hopeful" stuff with SMCC anymore right?
A. Correct. As of right now, there is no ongoing contractual relationship between Spooz and SFB/SMCC, which would be a revenue generating event for Spooz.
Q. I'm not sure if I get your point as we all know that Spooz or SMCC backed out of the deal.
A. The information provided attempted to detail the progression of the symbology effort and that SFB/SMCC initiated the contact with Spooz as SFB/SMCC wanted the Spooz software. Presently, SFB/SMCC currently provides terminal and data information to Bloomberg. The rumored deal between Bloomberg and Spooz was brought up by SFB/SMCC in my conversation. Repeat, I did not bring up the rumored Bloomberg/Spooz deal; SFB/SMCC brought up Bloomberg/Spooz deal. The Bloomberg deal will enable Spooz to sell terminals to Bloomberg, while SFB/SMCC will continue to provide the data feed to Bloomberg. Why would Bloomberg be interested in something other than the SFB/SMCC terminal? Please refer to the article showing the survey taken by market participants, that only 2 % were contemplating the SFB/SMCC terminal software for the Symbology effort. The final implementation date for the symbology effort is 2010, however market participants are free to adopt to the new standard before the final implementation date and are deciding right now which program to go with.
