Wed, Jul 30, 2014, 8:28 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 1 hr 2 mins


% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Parkervision Inc. Message Board

  • prkr_dreamer prkr_dreamer Oct 14, 2009 1:39 AM Flag

    If this is a scam, how much longer can it continue?

    I have been watching this board for probably 10 years now and I am familiar with those who regularly post here. I have finally decided start participating. When it comes to prkr, I have seen lots of big talk and little delivered for the ten years I have followed them. Further, with the ga-zillion patents they have, how come they haven't published in IEEE journals such as MTT-S? Even better, when the infamous Barron's article came out, how come prkr did not take any legal actions against them? Given this, I don't blame the shorts for how they feel and their passion that is driving them. But on the flip side, how is it PRKR manages to continue to be able to raise the millions of dollars they need to keep going? Then there are the conference calls where JP makes everything sound so great. Surely by now, if this were all not true, would there not be more than enough blatant violations for the SEC to close him down? Call it wishful thinking on my part, but I can't help but think there is something to this...and hence my long position and screen name "prkr_dreamer"

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • A sucker is borne every minute.. it can go down in history as the last scam to fiddle while Rome (the sham US economy) burned to the ground around investors.


      There are good companies that make products rather than just prototypes and false-starts. But since we are a nation of dreamers, without reason, this scam can go on until the next century!

      • 2 Replies to teamrep
      • "There are good companies that make products rather than just prototypes and false-starts. But since we are a nation of dreamers, without reason, this scam can go on until the next century!"

        That's just unreasonable. For three years we have been listening to people like you say the whole approach was impossible. A fraud. Well, apparently, it's not. You got that wrong.

        If your sourcing is as good as you claim then you must have heard about the figures of merit. I heard they were pretty good.

        Is the technology taking over the industry? No. You got that right.

        The real key is when does it come out in a shipping phone and what kind of improvement does the end user see? Time will tell. But to stlll be sitting there crying fraud just depreciates whatever credability you may have had.

        Also what about Farmwald's genius cell phone guru? Would that guy like to explain himself at this point? Another man sells his reputation for cash. Sacrificing ethics for proift as the Chinese say.

      • Why would LGI engage with Parker if it was all about ice-cream due to melt before it got into the kids hands? WHat is Parker a ghost writer now?

    • Bernie got away with it for a long time.......

    • I've been waiting a long time for news like this. Of course, before getting to excited, the next big hurtle will be for significant sales to and technology adoption by handset OEM/ODMs... (this assumes the press release is accurate and JP hasn't distorted the true performance of the samples).

    • it's unequivocal Farmwald and refutes every point you made in this post. last bastion of a scoundrel would seem to be your efficiency/pricing arguments that transparently ignore the highly predictable savings in both that will come from standard integration and shrink processes for subsequent generations - regardless, PV easily knocks that one off in the last sentence below.

      you and whatever is left of team Notes better start coming up with some new lies, pronto

      The handsets met all relevant industry standards and passed a series of tests that verify operational performance of the hardware when deployed on mobile phone networks. The customer verified that the d2p transmit chain achieved power consumption savings at all points along the RF transmit power curve when compared against the mass produced transmit chain that d2p replaced in the mobile phone reference design. The customer also determined that the power savings achieved by the sample handsets incorporating the d2p technology exceeded their own internal expectations for the initial mass production run of d2p chips.

    • well that was fast! - still more to go though.

    • What has happened over the last 10+ or 30+ years in US electronics industry? Answer: bAsic shift in the way funding and operations of new ventures develop.

      The US economy has gone from a nation of doers to a nation of derivatives investments in unsustainable ventures.

      30 years ago nobody would dream of developing a business that would not show proven results in sales and earnings trends for this long. Even biomedical companies expect to produce products after 10 years of R&D - and that industry has a several year period of clinical trials after the new drug or medical device has been developed - Parkerscamavision does not face similar delays.

      The country has gone through stages of capital formation: 30 years ago VCs typically required entrepreneurs to have proven products ready or nearly ready to enter the market and at least good candidate customer if not ongoing sales and contracts for future deliveries. H.P., Microsoft, Qualcomm, etc. all had proven tract record of sales in predecessor technologies or similar product markets before VC's bellied up to the bar with larger rounds of funding.

      The successes over the past 30+ years make a lot of VC and individuals rich. That money got plowed back into fresh rounds of start ups to repat the cycle... only each successive round required less proof and often more time between R&D and product sales.

      Meanwhile the national economy was growing top-heavy: spending on military electronics became the safe haven for companies who could not cut it in international commercial competition. Medical electronics has developed into a somewhat safe haven due to the long approval process. And more and more of the economy spun on derivatives investments and services oriented industries including consumer retail, Internet, and financial services and insurance. The US makes less and less, imports more and more, and relies on technology being built into products elsewhere. That has contributed to the tenuous connection between R&D and actual products and sales that makes it possible for a company like Parker to play shell games:

      "Which shell is the marble (a promise of results) under?" "Not not that one... and no you cannot see which one it was under. We will now put the marble under a new set of shells and you can pay for another try... here we go again."

      • 1 Reply to teamrep
      • "The country has gone through stages of capital formation...."

        Capital formation? In this country? Now? Hardy, har, har. All that happens here is if you have a publicly traded stock the institutional investors short sell to the retail investors then the institutional investors give the money from the short sales to the company for PIPE stock discounted 20% to 25% repay the short stock and sell the excess to the same retail investors and call it good. That's the only thing that the laws allow. All that Securities "reform" and "modernization" of the 1990's and early 2000's you know. The free market knows best they said. Furthermore there has not been one single prosecution for this type of activity in the last dozen years even though the evidence is overwhelming. For example find companies that did a PIPE that closed within say 10 or 15 days of a quarter end and compare the stock the investors got in the offering as disclosed in the offering filing to what those same "investors" reported at the end of the quarter on form 13-F. You will see that these "investors" bought hundreds of thousands if not millions of shares in the PIPEs, showed no holdings at all a mere 10 or 15 days later and the short interest of the company at issue magically went way up in the month or 6 weeks before the offering and back down immediately thereafter. And not a single prosecution. That is what capital formation means in the USA. We are so corrupt, errrr, I mean committed to free market principals, it's no wonder we are going bankrupt.

    • okay, and if you happen to be wrong about any of this you were just "tired" - right, doc?

    • I must have been pretty tired last night...

      I did not mean to say that GCT and Qualcomm are candidates for Via Telecom's future business. Qualcomm is a competitor to Via in the ultra low cost phone market, not a supplier.

      GCT is the most likely supplier for transceivers (minus the PA) for Via's next gen phones. Qualcomm is offering a alternative chipset for the ultra-cost-phone market.

      ParkerVision is not a player - (a) they don't have a transceiver product - they only have a half-baked transmitter/PA prototype, (b) the projected pricing numbers for the promised, pie-in-the-sky, PRKR transceiver are stupendously high - far higher than existing, shipping parts, and (c) the actual physical prototype transmitter/PA has at-best mediocre power efficiency (unlike the simulated numbers show earlier this year and in previous years, and certainly far lower than parts Anadigics has been shipping for 3 years.) The PRKR transmitter/PA protoype has especially poor efficiency at low transmit powers (under 16dBm), where cell phones spend nearly all of their time.

    • I agree no inividual investor should be long the POS, but with all the evidence over the last decade pointing to either massive incompetence or a reasonably well executed scam - it has been a fine vehicle for the small investor to short over the last few years. Due to the massive dilution JP has caused via offerings, it still has a ridiculous market cap for such a sleazeball company so there is still some juice left to squeeze out. Also since the price always drops to the offering price there is a near-term almost guaranteed 33% or so drop coming with the new offering.

    • Investment should not be interpreted as acceptance that the business is solid. An investor’s goal is to make money and that's it, not how they do it. Based on the investor’s method to make money, it does not have to align with PV making a product, or if we can dream, get real revenue. Given PV's very illiquid stock, with lots of volatility and very poor execution track record, this is only a target for unconventional investment, like a PIPE. I doubt Roth thought this was a great company, but it was a great deal for them from a low of 1.75 to where they are today. If Warren Buffet had invested in this company, well okay, that’s a different matter, but he hasn’t and no similar entity has. This is where PV has a real advantage over private companies, access to unconventional public funding vehicles. A private company or startup would have gone out of business 5 years ago with PV's execution and financial track record, as private investment has to be placed on tangible value 1-2 years after the idea phase. And we are waaaaaaaay past the idea stage here.

      So should one then extrapolate that any investment makes this on-going concern a great or good or even average company? No, absolutely not. And this is where the smaller investor can get, and has been burned often the last 3-8 years with this company, particularly long term investors. The only investment play here is short term momentum, in either direction, clearly not fundamentals. No one should be long in this stock – even if you think it is great and possibly believe Parker this go around, there must real revenue from a cell phone win to really start getting excited. Not another demonstration or another customer anouncement or some small services contract, gosh darn real dollars on the table from the sale of a product. There will be plenty of opportunity to get into this stock as revenue builds if we see any reasonable royalty revenue ever(not 10 or 100 units, but say the start of a production ramp), with a lot less risk I might add.

      ITT is meaningless – the whole value proposition was around large cellular markets, period. We need to see product $$$ from LG or VIA or other large unnamed cellular company to believe this opportunity. All this noise around a couple of PV/ITT press releases appears to me only an attempt for PV to show some sort of acceptance/action, because this was it for the year thus far. Most companies wouldn't bother highlighting a secondary market customer or a demonstration at a very small conference or a $130K contract win. When is the last time you saw RFMD spend the PR budget discussing a demonstration or that they made a $100K contract from something that isn't their core business. No, companies in this space discuss real design wins and revenue ramps. The funny thing is that I believe the news is so tepid out of ITT, but the fact there is any news, allows both PV and Farmwald camps to claim their position is correct, hence part of the amusing circus to watch.

    • View More Messages
1.320.00(0.00%)Jul 29 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.