dear dan,
you have an amazing knack for ignoring the facts and changing history. so once again dan, let's revisit and point out how deeply you've inserted your head in your rectum:
1. TERN claimed s-cdma was going to be the "next standard" and thus they'd make big money on their proprietary control of s-cdma. but, s-cdma was NOT the "next" standard. the next standard was DOCSIS 1.1 furthermore, there was no DOCSIS 1.2 standard (as tern claimed), rather cablelabs developed the 2.0 docsis standard...
2. while docsis 2.0 included s-cdma, tern claimed the benefit of docsis including s-cdma would be the significant royalties they'd generate by becoming the "next" docsis standard... the reality is, tern licensed s-cdma to cablelabs and TERNS OWN COMPETITORS ROYALTY FREE as cablelabs wouldn't include them in the standard any other way... as noted here in their 10k:
"In connection with the development of the DOCSIS 2.0 specification by CableLabs, we entered into an agreement with CableLabs whereby we licensed to CableLabs on a royalty-free basis any of our intellectual property rights to the extent that such rights may be asserted against a party desiring to design, manufacture or sell DOCSIS based products, including DOCSIS 2.0 based products. This license agreement grants to CableLabs the right to sublicense our intellectual property, including our intellectual property rights in our S-CDMA patents, to manufacturers that compete with us in the marketplace for DOCSIS based products."
3. at the end of the day, tern does not control the technology that's the "new" standard, (as you and they claimed they would), and to make matters worse there's no real way now for TERN to corner the market and make piles of money (as you said they would), because their license for the s-cdma technology is ROYALTY FREE to their own competittors.
We believe tern stock was significantly inflated based on tern false and misleading statements in this regard, and the suggestion they would achieve significant revenue from their "proprietary" s-cdma technology. we also believe TERN management KNEW s-cdma would NOT be included in any docsis standard without giving away the technology via a royalty free license. a fact we believe they failed to disclose to shareholders while they instead hyped their proprietary position...
4. the other reality dan is our report strongly rec'd a sell at $162... where's the stock now dan?
5. you also incorrectly quote our report regarding tern sales of docsis modems. what we pointed out at the time of our report was tern was buying a re-labeling the only docsis modem they were selling - thus they had an insignificant margin on the product. until we forced them to admit this fact, they had misled investors into thinking otherwise.
them's the REAL facts dan, it's a shame you can't admit you were wrong... although your stubborn ignorance and baseless attacks on pluvia do say volumes about you - and your credibility.
cheers
steve p |
