Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 8:00 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Aware, Inc. Message Board

  • fd_rox fd_rox Mar 24, 2013 8:58 AM Flag


    There are many years of material on this board documenting the non-compliance of Aware with Securities laws. There are several 13d's files by investors that also provide a good summary for most of these issues.

    There are any of three scenarios that could describe your post: your an idiot and don't understand this investment, lazy and haven't done your due dilly, or you are in some way connected to the Aware mgmt and like to deny the obvious failures of the organization.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Are you long or short AWRE? If long, as people here seem to think - though with "few shares" - why, if there are serious allegations against management?

      As for me, I am a technical trader, not an investor and not likely to be here long. I read these boards for entertainment purposes mostly, but also to educate myself about the company while I wait for my trade to either validate or invalidate itself.

      The personalities of the people are more interesting to me than the company itself. There are almost always loud-mouth shorts and loud-mouth longs with little intelligence. But here there is none of that - there is the hushed quiet of a library where apparently knowledgeable people disagree among themselves about whether management has violated securities. Yet all are apparently long - which I find highly unusual.

      So, if you are long, I can't understand your position. If you are long, you are apparently too tied to the company to sell your shares (401-K or some such) and yet desperately wishing to shine the light of truth into the dark recesses of management's nefarious deeds. You seem like a weak-minded person to me - emotionally damaged in some way and yet lacking the courage to sever ties and move on, or else just a pathetically disgruntled person who has no hope for things to ever be right and just sticks around to whine and complain.

      I dunno and, to be quite honest, don't really care very much. Like I said, I think the conversations on this board are very unusual. Who would be long and believe that management is guilty of serious securities violations?

      • 1 Reply to yatozhe
      • "Who would be long and believe that management is guilty of serious securities violations? "

        Someone who buys when the company trades at par or at a discsount to cash on the balance sheet and sells when prices recover to more reasonable levels. Aware has gone through this cycle more than once in its history. Its a long-term trade/investment.

        If you are long, the success of your trade may well depend on the success of those investors that understand this company well enough to force fair treatment of all shareholders. This tightly held company is run for the benefit of the inside majority. Many assets have vanished without discussion. Bringing enlightenment to uninformed shareholders like yourself might help you to keep better track of your interests, which collectively helps me too.

    • I'll assume your are lazy, but genuine in your question. What could Aware do to prove they have not looted the IP assets?

      1) Firstly, they could acknowledge the assignment of RE40281 to Hybrid Audio and dicsuss the terms of that assignment along with the terms of the settlement of the case HA vs HTC et al.

      2) Secondly they could provide proof of ownership of Daphimo as a way to assure no insiders retained interest in those IP assets. Furthermore a comment on whether Aware has any interest in the eventual monetization of the Daphimo patents would be desireable.

      Note that both 1) and 2) represent a disposition of assets that requires by law, the filing of form 8K. No 8K was filed for either transaction. In the TQD sale, PWC required Aware to file form 8K and within days, PwC was fired as Aware's Independent Accounting firm. Interesting! The TQD sale even has a licensing agreement tied to it which is available to shareholders upon request from the SEC.

      • 4 Replies to fd_rox
      • JM, now it appears we are done with the strategic alternatives as they relate to IP. That has come and gone without the spin-off. Which is fine, especially if the 91MM$ was it. They would really have been crazy to even consider the spin-off.

        I would be OK with the current outcome as is if we had assurances that everything occurred above board. The cloaked nature of the transactions have to become reconciled at some stage. In my opinion, we have gone way beyond what is necessary to preserve the integrity of the desired outcome. The management of Aware have to be accountable to their shareholders and to regulators regarding their actions. For now, they have managed to avoid any scrutiny whatsoever.

        I am not worried that they will get away with anything, but I am impatient.

      • Good questions indeed.

        Evidently management agrees these are fundamental questions essential for shareholders since they previously communicated on multiple occasions that they were assessing strategic alternatives.

        But they can't claim that they're still assessing their strategic alternatives - not for a company this size with so few product lines. It's just not that complicated.

        No, it's got to be legal, tax or competitive reasons associated with engaging in patent infringement litigation against larger companies with much deeper pockets ... and using third parties or shell companies to do so. Or some kind of maleficence.

      • Agreed. However, we have gotten to the point were the lion share of the patent portfolio has been liquidated and now we have no idea of why we are invested here. Has the asset composition changed dramatically or has it not? If we cannot answer that question there is a serious problem, no?

        Have we really assigned away the telecom/dsl/communications patents for 99MM$? Are we really left with just an interest in the biometric business? Clearly that is the message from Bedford. All of that occurs without a proper disclosure to shareholders?

        At this stage, I am more interested in the 200 MM$ Stafford received from TD Bank when he sold his options business. His personal assets become my target, until he fulfills his obligation to me.

      • Yes but ... as previously discussed...

        We don't know that the patent assignments to HA and Daphimo were dispositions - i.e. sales. You keep assuming that they were sales - and they may be - but we don't know that. All we know is that an Aware patent was assigned to HA and Aware got income from Daphimo. This and MT's 4Q08 cc comments and the lack of further disclosures suggest it might be assignment not sales of the patents. Assignment is quite different than a sale - look it up in a law book. Assignment is not a disposition.

        And either way - sale or assignment - they might not be material because either they made a poor deal (i.e. too cheaply) or if compensation is contingent and not yet risen to the level of materiality yet. We really can't say for sure without knowing the terms of the deals.

5.00-1.63(-24.59%)Jul 25 3:59 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.