Replies to post #53119 on e.Digital Corporation (fka EDIG)

[owd3]

now you are just trying to be funny, right?

You can't have it both ways here, just yesterday you were taking me to task for my recollection that EDIG did not make very much from the B&O deal. You proved how bad my memory was by showing how BIG a revenue boost this was for EDIG, you went back to the March 10-Q to prove your point. Now today you claim it was "a small revenue stream" because it helps you formulate an excuse for why it is no longer mentioned???

Plus, when you write this:

" The fact that a small revenue stream is not mentioned in the 10-Q but is in the 10-K is normal."

Do you not remember that you just extensively quoted the March EDIG 10-Q about that this "small revenue" stream?? So did you mean it is normal except for the instance you quoted? And the several 10-Q's that it is mentioned in before that one? You mean normal other than those mentions?

When the B&O deal was announced it was gong to be huge!! This many world wide outlets times this many players per month times the hundreds per each EDIG was going to rake in for each unit. Now after the numbers are known, you all change the tune to say it was never going to be big, it was just a "showcase", and the whole deal is swept under the rug. I wonder what the excuse for not making any money on GW will be? Do you think they will come up with one, or like the Musical deal, do you think they will just laugh when you ask them about it a year from now? APS has "showcase" written all over it, doesn't it?

And as we have already established, my memory isn't the greatest, so when you write:

"Didn't you just yesterday finish responses to your DD telling us that Gateway is not using e.Digital?

Still want to claim that?"

I don't remember posting an opinion that the GW player was or was not EDIG's. I really don't remember posting any DD in regards to the issue. Are you referring to my posts in response to Todd's accusations that EDIG seriously misrepresented their involvement in the design of the entire Odyssey line? Where he suggested that EDIG's claim of owning the designs of the whole Odyssey line were lies to make things look better to share holders? Is that what you are referring to here?

[JimC2003]

What a riot. You guys crack me up.

The fact that a small revenue stream is not mentioned in the 10-Q but is in the 10-K is normal.

Reporting requirements are not arbitrary. You can rest assured that whenever money flows into or out of a company, said company is required by the law of the land to disclose this information.

The idea underlying timely reporting requirements for public companies (eg quarterly financial reports) is providing current and prospective investors with a snapshot of the company's current and prospective business.

Any information a reasonable person ought to require in making a investment decision is required to be disclosed in the company's quarterly reports. Cash flows or a reasonable expectation of future cash flows is a primary data set which should be disclosed on a quarterly basis.

The annual report should include all pertinent and material information from the four quarters it represents.

JimC2003