Shazz/Austin/Henry: re positive statements made by HelloSoft about the Embarq technology.
My point is that one could simply compensate an entity to make such an assertion or claim. This is in no way unique or exclusive to NVEI; it's a frequently used 'tactic' in the OTC investing world. To counter it by saying HelloSoft would tarnish their reputation with such an alliance is ludicrous, since the only ones who pay attention to NVEI are its current and potential investors. Any future partnership or service engagement HelloSoft may have with another client would not be impacted by this NVEI saga. I am not suggesting that their positive statements about NVEI cannot be legitimate, however its more advantageous to be critical in your thinking to reveal the truth, especially in the realm of investing. There is an old proverb that says: Don't lock the stable door after the horse has been stolen. Obviously meaning it's foolish to take precautions after the damage is done; its better to be preventative, which requires prudence of thought based on an assessment of the situation at hand.
Now lets apply this to NVEIs history. If all of the current positive claims are indeed correct and NVEI is a corporation of integrity, as you and a few others seem to suggest, how is it possible to explain or elucidate the following events:
-NVEI projected to have the FPGA completed by the end of 2002
-NVEI projected to have the FPGA completed by the end of 2003
-NVEI projected to have the FPGA completed by the end of 2004 (all these claims were documented)
-NVEI now contemplates the FPGA will be completed by the end of 2005
-Despite many attempts, NVEI has been unable to secure a funding deal (how could this be so with such a revolutionary product)
-NVEI claimed an Intellicon merger
-NVEI claimed a Hytek acquisition
-NVEIs projections of $40,000,000 gross from the movie was way off base, so were their revised projections (or...err...their reiterated projections) of $20,000,000
-NVEI verified the Lucent confirmation of the Cu@OCx technology, which later was proven not to work
-NVEI claimed the Mercatus loan was all but a done deal; it simply required an increase in authorized shares (which we now know is not true)
-NVEI claimed their past reverse split was for the purpose of a Nasdaq listing.
-NVEI claimed a major financing deal from Lily Beter.
-NVEI talked about "underpromising and overdelivering"; yet what occurred was "overpromising and underdelivering"
You can probably deduce from the above statements, as a long time follower of NVEIs corporate history, I have become skeptical for justified reasons. Therefore, how is the current HelloSoft agreement any more compelling then the ones mentioned above? Are the above statements not a rational reason for concern? Some people here went as far as saying that these past failures were intentional because NVEI has an "ace in the hole" - sounds more like wishful thinking. Some may simply see this as an attempt to 'bash' a stock, when nothing could be further from the truth. I desire for my investment to be successful, yet I cannot turn a blind eye from such obvious facts which shaped my current cynicism and doubt. Could the future bring different results? Absolutely it can. But the obligation and responsibility of proof is now on squarely on NVEIs shoulders – they owe that to shareholders.
As the old phrase says, "Don't judge a book by its cover" – this is very applicable to NVEI, peer back at its history. Examine carefully. The truth is always there; its just waiting to be discovered.
Good luck to you and everyone here.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
