Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Parkervision Inc. Message Board

  • roundermatt roundermatt Dec 3, 2007 5:37 PM Flag

    Sterne vs. Farmwald

    Notios couldn't be more wrong when he characterizes Mr. Sterne's statements this morning as that of an advocate who is not responsible for the claims he makes. The man specified that he was speaking from personal knowledge and enumerated his background and qualifications for making those statements, including:

    Lifelong interest in RF
    BoS and MS in engineering with emphasis on RF
    Founder and head of preeminent Washington law firm in IP, especially RF IP
    Unlimited access to Parkervision technology and personnel
    Army of highly qualified EE/attorney's assisting him in evaluations

    He even specifically said he was skeptical at first, but that what he came to understand, not just blindly trust, persuaded him to take the extraordinary risk of joining the board and now very specifically refuting every claim made by Farmwald. Listen to the call - don't believe Notios when he spins it as not specific, not accountable.

    Mr. Sterne knows damn well that if he lied today, if ESP doesn't do everything Mr. Parker said it does, that he (Sterne) committed fraud. And what is at stake is his career, law license and fortune that cannot be shielded from personal torts like fraud through an insurance policy. He laid it all on the line and I've never seen anything like it by a lawyer in his position and particularly of his stature. He has much more to lose than Farmwald. Speaking of which, let's compare them:

    Each are about as highly successful.
    Each are about as educated.
    Sterne's expertise in RF is far more applicable.
    Sterne's access is far greater.
    Sterne's resources applied to the evaluation are far greater.
    We know Farmwald distorts, hides, lies.
    We have no such indications for Sterne.

    So who do you believe?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Farmwald

    • >>>Mr. Sterne knows damn well that if he lied today, if ESP doesn't do everything Mr. Parker said it does, that he (Sterne) committed fraud.<<<
      >>>So who do you believe?<<<

      There you go again. Don't you know by now (what, are you 12 years old?) that attorneys are trained to advocate a position without telling a lie? That a fine attorney like Sterne knows exactly what he can and cannot say? ESP may indeed do everything Massa Parker says it will do, and still be a commercial failure. What of that? Did Sterne claim that PRKR's technology is NOT a commercial failure? I didn't hear it.

      Of course Sterne didn't tell a lie. Why would he bother? It would be risky and unnecessary.

      What does Sterne have to lose? Plenty, if PRKR falls. A good client, for one thing.

      He did not specifically refute every claim of the skeptics. He addressed a few of them, but not convincingly.

      What he didn't address is why, after so many years, a supposedly good/great technology has not sold. It's not even a matter, as often happens, of getting an entire industry to change an industry standard like VHS, CDMA, or IP.

      All PRKR has needed to do to get adoption is to convince one wireless device maker to use their products. They haven't done it, as far as we can tell (jury still out on ITT). They had to pay Texas Instruments to make chips for them, and disguised it as a partnership. They tried to get IBM to make chips, too, but that failed, when IBM apparently got cold feet and canceled the deal. In desperation, PRKR then hired Boeing to evaluate the technology, afterwards claiming it was a "successful" test, but then they never released the Boeing report. According to Forbes,

      "Dale Klotz, Boeing's Manager of RF and Mimic Development in the Solid-State Electronics Development department, performed the test that ParkerVision claims supported its statements. Mr. Klotz was quoted in an article concerning ParkerVision in the September 20, 1999 edition of Forbes Magazine. In this article Mr.Klotz states that the product Boeing tested for ParkerVision "didn't do anything better, or faster, or more efficiently." Equally important, Mr. Klotz stated that Boeing did not know whose RF product it was testing and that the ParkerVision RF product tested "could have been anybody's part." These Boeing statements directly and resoundingly contradict ParkerVision's claims, which form the foundation of its stock promotion."
      http://pvnotes.com/pdfs/ascencio/AscencioBoeing1999.pdf

      PRKR even went to the expense (millions of your dollars, longs!) of putting a WiFi product on the market to demonstrate its technology. Then they withdrew it, all the while claiming victory.

      PRKR is very careful to make statements of personal opinion, not fact. Things like "We are confident our unique approach will succeed" - such a statement can never be proven to be a lie. See other examples: http://pvnotes.com/market_quotes.html

      Get real, folks. Can you see a pattern here, or not?

      Notios

      • 1 Reply to notios70
      • Notios, you do not seem like the small time short, who can turn his position on a dime, that you say you are. Your interest in alternative energy is remarkably similar to Bill Alpert's - another reason I think you are his buddy Farmwald. BTW, you forgot to mention to me that EEEI had a conference on Saturday, so as with the Barron's news for PRKR over the weekend, your 'predictions' just don't seem as impressive to me when they are put in their true perspective.

        Your spin is starting to look exactly like Farmwald's bluster. I've jousted with you before, remember, as PVnotes, before you ran away. As I start to hit the nerves, you escalate the personal insults and start this specious mixing timeframes (pre-WiFi and now) and distortions of past deals that you claim Parkervision distorts.

        Well I'm not 12, unfortunately for you, and I do know the difference from advocate and a director attributing his statements to personal knowledge. You don't seem to want to understand that at all. It is obviously a very important distinction if you are Mike Farmwald, as I strongly suspect.

        Farmwald said ESP is not a significant PROVEN advance in RF conversion technology and Mr. Sterne say it is and he is amplifying not backing away. Farmwald's latest quote is specious hair splitting as he retreats from the cheat. Now Farmwald says Parkervision technology does not represent a significant improvement to PAs, but he completely avoids the real issue -- that it is a revolutionary change to the entire transmit chain.

    • >>>Notios couldn't be more wrong when he characterizes Mr. Sterne's statements this morning as that of an advocate who is not responsible for the claims he makes.<<<

      Excuse me! Yes, Attorney Sterne is an advocate; he's bound by his professional responsibilities to be an advocate for his client. As for the phrase "not responsible for the claims he makes" which you attributed to me --- that is entirely your invention.

      I never said such a thing and would not. Of course Attorney Sterne is responsible for everything he says AND he is also required to be an advocate for his client.

      More and more I think you work for Sterne or his firm. Care to deny that one? Remember, your ip address is on record.

      Notios

      • 1 Reply to notios70
      • I do deny it or that I have EVER worked for his firm. Notios, your spin just doesn't cut it on this one. What Mr. Sterne has done - joining the board (twice) and now making a statement like this from his personal knowledge is not a requirement for patent attorney or any other kind ... in fact, I've been investing a long time and I've never seen anything like it, let alone with one as prominent and with as much to lose as Mr. Sterne, making an endorsement that would be bound to ruin him if Farmwald were anything but the perfect con man he accuses Jeffrey Parker of being.

        Notios about me:
        <I think you work for Sterne or his firm. Care to deny that one? >

    • I believe that PRKR's financials give the best indication as to who is to be believed.

    • why do you say M Farmwald is a liar? - he is worth 100's of millions, mostly from rambus, was a EE professor at Stanford and is generally considered one os the top ee's in the US - and ... Sterne is prkr's lawyer.

 
PRKR
0.366-0.024(-6.15%)Jul 2 4:00 PMEDT