Calypso Wireless (fka CLYW)

[stitch_surfs]

Accuracy vs. Denial.

That seems to be the real issue here. When I made my initial post, I wasn't actually negative on Calypso. If anything I was neutral but hopeful. However, when the majority of the members of this board responded to my well-intentioned factual post with such hostility, it actually resulted in a lot of additional research to verify my facts and re-evaluate my prior thoughts.

I have done so here: http://www.wireless-weblog.com/50226711/uma_gains_more_momentum_can_anyone_answer_the_challenge.php

You can read or not as you collectively see fit.

I will make some other statements here, though.

Many of you are far too technicially ignorant to have such apparently extreme exposure on such a technical stock. The fact that you do not know that UMA is a technology protocol, not a company is scary, that you don't know the difference between UMA and Zibgee and are invested in this stock, scarier still.

UMA is simply an acronym for Unlicensed Mobile Access (unlicensed referring to the unlicensed spectrum (read: Wi-FI) that the devices access in addition to the cellular (GSM, etc.) network).

Further, the "little" companies that are behind the UMA specification include: Motorola, Sony-Ericcson, Seimens, Alcatel, T-Mobile USA, Cingular, Orange and others..I think all told that represents about $10 or $15 billion in annual revenues, but it's late (or early) I'm tired so I'm not going to pull the numbers, my estimate is probably a few billion or more low but that would only make the statement "little companies" seem even more ridiculous.

Anyway, my intention was not to upset folks, but to share knowledge...that is what I appreciate, even when it might not be what I wanted to hear; but then it occurred to me that perhaps people here are in so deep, are so committed that anything but good news is unacceptable.

If this is your situation, I sincerely hope that my assesments are wrong. I have nothing to gain by being right.

-Oliver