If you look at news section on the web-site you see two items close to the top of the list. One article directly adresses the partnering between Affirmed and Elephant Talk. The other article talks of the Vodafone LOWI application in Spain and how its built upon the ETAK and Affirmed software platforms.
So now you know there is a ETAK/Affirmed connection to ATT and Voda.
So now you have to buy another device, pay a subscription and carry it around with you in addition to a phone, but it does not text, talk, photo, video, flash light. Yes very exciting. Oh wait, no, hard to figure why that is better than a phone.
Instead of growth rates accelerating they will be rolling over now that there is no major Sim deployment. How does the Iusacell large-scale delpoyment affect those waiting to see it succeed before pulling the trigger? What if there is an issue with ETAK that is causing the change of plan from Iusacell?
These will be important points of uncertainty to deal with directly at the CC so some concerns can be lifted.
the Sidoti were not impressed!
Something is clearly wrong with the stock. You have to agree, that the lack of update in front of these investor presentations suggests that there is still nothing to say about Iusacell. And that is a very negative harbinger for Q's 4 and 1. The stock trades at 79 cents at the least because of the botched job the CEO has done in setting expectations and at most because some investors know of a serious problem within this company.
Neither situation is a good reflection on the leadership of this company.
I agree with you. SVV's delinguency should not result in slack on the leash, but rather just the opposite. Shareholders should expect prompt response. Early in the new year is still 6 months late?
If the potential is real, this company will be bought. They have no inherent justification to remain independent. Very small breadth of product, no scale and no proven ability to grow. They may or may not have a critical element of technology that can be massively deployed. If they do, there are much better suited companies to do the mass deployment. Ones that have already demonstrated an ability to do so in other segments.
IWSY does not have the luxury of time, given the finiancial thin ice they are on. This industry is going to start moving quickly. If the revenues are not ramping up, you will have your answer pretty quickly.
Will the industry build a solution around a company thast is barely solvent or around a strong standard. I think it is unrealistic to assume critical solutions are being built upon IWSY's meager existence. Best they can hope for is to be bought for their patents or they fill infringement suits against the solutions that do get traction.
IWSY is already way over valued relative to anything fundamental. There is no signs of a significant boost to their business. Meanwhile Intel is innovating. That means big trouble for little fry who was unable to get their footprint established before the entry of the big fish. The only thing you can hope for is that IWSY has a key patent. Then they may have a negotiating position to benefit from the industry growth. Aware is in the same position. THey are much better situated from a cash and cash flow position but show very little signs of knowing how or even desiring to grow their operating business.
If Intel isn't buying your company because they perceive it is of value to them, you can assume they do not need you. A few biometric lightweights in this category. IWSY, AWRE BIO-Key ... if they have any unique value expect Intel to pounce, otherwise, forever not going anywhere. THese litttle tech companies just don't have the scale or know-how to make real money.
This company costs its shareholders dearly. Their lack of ability or willingness to provide a clear strategy around their growth plan and core value proposition causes the market to place little or no value on the company beyond its cash holdings.
If this was a fleeting condition, it would not be such a big issue. However, this condition has been in place for many years and covers many aspects of Aware's business including IP monetization, and Biometrics. Not only does Aware not provide relevant information about its business. They have been known to provide inaccurate information. The company apparently mis-led when they appointed the current Co-Interim-CEO's almost 4 years ago. They lied about the existence of off-balance sheet entities for at least 3 SEC reporting periods. They have withheld any information about new contracts in biometrics such that the only folks who have any clue about what to expect are insiders.
There is suspicious trading in the stock that gives appearances of improprieties, especially in light of the apparently unnecessary tight-lipped policy on business plan discussion with shareholders.
How can anyone take what Ed says seriously, as long as this condition prevails? Aware has had zero material new contracts occur over the last 12+ months! How can that be, in this growth industry?
You are a JackAsss, If you think anyone on this board puts a french lick of credence into anything you say.
Oh, you mean the patent arrangement that was, and then was not , and then was again! They spend more time double talking then they do trying to say something tangible and meaningful. As a consequence, the market places nearly zero value on Aware's future money making potential. Shareholders pay dearly in present market value because of the incompetence of Stafford, Russell and Moberg.