Actually Little Engine,
The "facts" that you posted do not present an "objective" view of DGIV either... in "fact'" they are not always facts...
FACT: Outstanding shares are constantly increasing.
True statement if one looks over the course of the 2 year history of DGIV. The number of shares outstanding has been essentially flat since the time I got into this stock though... about 7 months ago. Furthermore, this is hardly a unique for small companies first starting out... shares of stock may be one of the few negotiable and liquid assets the company has at its disposal. As long as the company manages this asset responsibly, an increase in the number of shares may not represent a problem.
Lastly, the number of outstanding shares is currently 19M+ out of 20M authorized. There is not a lot of room for additional dilution without increasing the authorized number, which requires a shareholders meeting.
FACT: Management put out a PR in April claiming they had an audit for 1997, but refused to release it. Said in April that a 10-K would be filed "soon," but in December, have not even set a date for its release.
FACT: In September, put out a PR saying they had no idea when financials will be out.
Yup... true. And they released a separate PR in April that said they were preparing for full reporting status and that The company will take this action with the aim of listing on Nasdaq's Small Cap market. They also issued a PR in September that at the very least implied they would have the 10-SB filed prior to to completion of a New York show they were attending, Spetember 23-25.
...And the PR in September indicated that the release of the 10-SB couldn't be predicted.
That the financials and 10-SB have not been issued in the time frame originally promised was of major concern to me and many others. The missed deadline on the 10-SB caused me to reduce my risk exposure in this stock. However, there is a bit of a silver lining to this dark cloud. The company ANNOUNCED that it would miss the deadline rather than letting it pass without acknowledgement of the problem. I take heart from that little bit of honesty...
Now, once the acknowledgement of the missed deadline is made, they also hint that the release of such information would no longer be a priority for the company at this time. That sentiment was basically backed up by several conversations with corporate officers. You indicate that this is a negative thing. Possibly. I can also think of at least 2 sound strategic reasons to not release that information.
FACT: The firm has not signed any Internet telephony contracts.
No, the fact is that you don't KNOW your statement to be true. Nor do we KNOW that the firm has signed contracts either. In fact, we don't KNOW that the company is close to doing any deals. I would strongly suspect that they have no signed contracts, just as I would strongly suspect that they are close to one or more revenue generating deals and one or more financing deals... just as you suspect none of that is true. But, neither of us can presently prove our positions.
FACT: Management put out a "clarification" of memo on Egypt negotiations, saying that even if the got the contract, they may not have the resources to fulfill it.
So? That is certainly not news to anybody that has even the most remote idea of what Digitcom's financial circumstances were at the time of the PR. A couple of thoughts here... the Egypt PR probably should have had a "safe harbor statement" attached... this PR acted as that safe harbor statement. SI Share holders were inundating DGIV's IR department with inquiries about the previous Egyptian PR... the PR you are referring to was probably a reaction to the over abundance of euphoria that we, as a group, expressed. We jumped to conclusions that were unfounded by the previous company statement. I believe the company was trying to rectify those false assumptions on our part.
FACT: In March, DGIV claimed to have a contract with "Louis International," for $1 million a month in business. Never mentioned again. Requests for even a phone number for Louis International (you would think a telecommunications company would have one) have gone unfulfilled.
This is a FALSE statement. The word contract was not used... the word agreement was. They are essentially the same, but I want to clarify so there is no misunderstanding about the following quote from the PR.
Terms of the agreement commit Louis International to bring $1 Million per month or more in traffic to Digitcom's U.S. telephone switching facility within 90 days of signing.
We, as a group, interpreted that to mean the signing was iminent and that revenues would basically start in June... maybe July. That was silliness on our part. However, I do believe that Digitcom did word that PR to lead us to that conclusion. That and the fact that they have left us in the dark as to the status of the negotiations (officially anyway) is indefensible, in my opinion.
Little Engine, every one of us who is invested in DGIV for the long term knows that this is a risky company in a new (read risky) field and the stock is traded in a risky market structure in an overall risky economic environment. This is not news. It is not news that the company has not reported their financial condition. It is not news that the company seems determined to not announce anything until it has been DONE (thank you DGIV!). We understand this and accept it as part of our investment. Heck, you can call it speculation if you'd like. No skin off my heinie.
Lazarus, with a few thoughts |
