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


  • MoeShanley MoeShanley May 3, 2012 10:20 AM Flag

    Location based services

    Did anyone notice the article "Wearable devices support wireless tracking" in Tuesdays USA today, by Roger Yu? According to the article ABI Research estimates the market for GPs personal tracking devices will grow 40% or more annually and exceed $1 billion by 2017" Further in the article " Wireless carriers, looking for ways to make money beyond transmitting data along their networks for smartphones and tablets are fueling the boom. "We think this is the single biggest growth opportunity-that every device is connected" says Glenn Lurie head of AT & /T's emerging devices team." Look at the complete article.

    This is the single most frustrating issue for me. None of the old board had a clue about the business opportunity for Trace Technologies. The new board has never made an inquiry about Trace and its business model, yet they are "Leading the charge" in the dispute with Qualcomm. The article lists a few of the smallest business opportunites for Trace. The old board blew it, and the new board may not have a clue about what they are missing. We brought two way location services to being, with Trace and Locate. See why QC is fighting so hard for the whole carrot?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • appellate court judges

    • Blame me for Qualcomm deposing me? Gabriel had the chance over 4 years to sit down and discuss Trace, its negotiations with Qualcomm. Instead they threatened with all sorts of BS hired a private investigator to investigate my work at Trace and Gabriel and came up with nothing, then threatened to take my options and bonus away. When I sent a letter offering to clear up what I thought were some errors in the early filings, they sent me a nasty attorney letter telling me not to talk to management, board members or GWLK attorneys. I did send a copy of that letter to QC's attorneys with no explantion or comment. QC would have ended up with the letter when I got supeoned. If GWLK attorneys did not want QC to see that letter they should not have sent it to me. They had the opportunity to depose me before QC did and they didn't. They showed up at QC's deposition and seemed to me, to be surprised by the 30 plus pieces of correspondence between me as President of Trace and Qualcomm related to busiess dicussions and negotiations related to the Revised/Amended License Agreement. Many of the docs submitted by QC surprised me as I did not think they were advantageous to QC. Gabriel's managment and attorneys should have discussed those docs and what was going on at the time between Trace and QC so they had the necessary background. I don't know what QC submitted to the court related to my depositin but they did pick and choose what they did submit. Gabriels attorneys could have been in a position to counter QC's attorneys move. I then cooperated with an affidavit to counter QC's misrepresentations. Gabriel left the door open as far a I am concerned. If I had my way I would not have attended QC's depositon, but I am not going to jail for not appearing. Looks to me like a failure on GWLK managment not to use people and information who know what was going on. This is a compliacted suit, not the laydown you expected.

    • Unless Trace owns the patent rights to these opportunities, how can you expect them to compete with the likes of Qcom and other large tech companies. Gwlk has limited capital. I would rather see them use this to obtain the patents that may legally belong to the company versus spending it to get into the GPS market.