notm, you didn't ask me, but please consider...
I said I wasn't going to post here anymore, but I've been getting requests. So, I thought I'd take another shot. Maybe this one will survive.
I don't know jimr and he can certainly speak for himself, but maybe he just doesn't want to post the obvious. Also, I have no idea whether the price will go to .00001 or in the other direction from here, but there is IMO a plausible explanation as to why it isn't moving past a penny.
Other than an article or two from some penny stock website, most if not all of the supposed "DD" in this forum is based on what other shareholders have done or what they "feel" about EDIG. I think it's wonderful what a few shareholders have done in the bankruptcy proceeding and I congratulate them on being successful in that endeavor, but that alone does not, and cannot, substitute for the company's fundamentals. At some point, in order for the stock price to go up other than based on a few days of message board hype, the company must have earnings. As a result, the question becomes where those earnings are going to come from.
Concerning the patents, it has been irrefutably shown over the last several years that nuisance value settlements "validate" nothing --- if the opposite was true, continued nuisance value settlements would have had the effect of a progressively increasing stock price. Additionally, and according to those who have touted the stock over that period, the company was represented by great patent lawyers. So, if the patents are so groundbreaking/whatever, then why were they never worth more than nuisance value?
By analogy, pretty much the same thing can be said of the new water device. Mr. Nunally says it's great, but has anyone else who has analyzed it on an objective basis? If so, who, and what has been the result?
In summary, it's one thing for a company to tout it's own stuff, but whether such is true is another story. I still haven't seen a working model of anything based on the patents, nor of the water device. Some folks say they have seen the latter, but it seemed that this was during one of the group's meetings at the courthouse during one of the bankruptcy hearings. Sure, that device might "light up when it's plugged in", but is it really effective from a marketplace standpoint?
Mr. Nunally may well have a "proven management team" that is ready to take over EDIG, but in order to be successful, they must have products and/or technology that is marketable. In other words, in order to be successful, a management team must have something that is capable of being successfully managed. In EDIG's case, other than what the company has described but never demonstrated, just what would that be?
If you cannot answer the above question on a realistic basic, don't feel alone --- I can't either, and apparently, neither can anyone else. That may well be why the stock price is stagnant below a penny.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
