Replies to post #35495 on World Surveillance Group Inc (fka WSGI)

[sinful]

Pitbull: it seems to me that Tim Huff said the company was unable to respond publicly until Nov. I think that's what I recall.

[Peeb]

Pit, In the Q1 report of May 6, Huff stated, "The achievements of Sanswire Networks have generated tremendous interest from both the private and government sectors. This heightened interest will be shared with you in the coming weeks."

This "sharing" is obviously linked to successful strat II testing. Also remember Huff stating that it was "fully funded"?

Since the strat II project took a back seat to the military strat project last Summer and Fall, I think that this was something that GTE did as part of an agreement with Raytheon in exchange for Raytheon funding both projects ("tenatative support"). So it could well be that the Sky Dragon (or whatever) is now (at least primarily) Raytheon's baby.

IMO, Raytheon and Sanswire are quite connected and this will be revealed at some point after flight testing begins and the disclosure of this relationship will greatly add to share value.

[ColeThornton]

The response to the Russian mess should have been the announcement of a lawsuit against Internafta. I realize "binding" contracts are broken, but companies get sued over this all the time. The term "binding" when put in front of contract has significant meaning. It means that both parties entered into it have the means to fulfill their end of the deal... ie Internafta really had the money and GTE was ready willing and able to install the network. It also means the wording in the contract lends itself to whatever means is available for enforcement... ie a lawsuit. GlobeTel did everything they could have as far as extending deadlines etc... but when it became obvious the money was never going to come, they should have sued Internafta. EVEN IF they felt they had little chance of prevailing. Just by filing and making the announcement they would have preserved any credibility they had left. By simply rolling over when Internafta didn't deliver it made it appear they never had a "binding" contract to begin with. If that is true, it was possibly the most egregious example of "over promotion" yet. The lawsuits against GlobeTel were announced shortly afterwards and this point played most prominently in them. The failure of the Russian deal led to class action lawsuits, announced delisting and a 58 cent share price. Didn't Mr. Huff realize how serious this was.
If he really had a binding contract, why didn't he act like it?