HI M.M.,
Very interesting the posts by you & Gus. I too have heard such "rumors"
but at this point that's all they are. However I correspond with some people
that I've put the question to and am awaiting replies. I also have asked for
some more responses or reports about this meeting. I've seen 2(?) and I
believe they are both shorts. I definitely remember one lady "dozed off"
according to her own post. I've got to tell you I could see dozing off at an
insurance convention, but a stockholder's meeting?
Anyhow, while awaiting some replies I've been snooping around and guess
what I found? A copy of the agreement Esping signed with MatriDigm
detailing the terms of his being hired as both a consultant and C.O.B. of MD.
NOTE; Esping's company is also chartered in Delaware(?)
Must be something in the water(?)
Again my scanning (.tif) file conversion didn't work so I have to type it.
It's over 40 pages long but the part I'm copying is the Performance Criteria
Esping spelled out that MD was expected to attain, dates for attaining them
AS WELL AS production cost per LOC, Scan efficiency, and Fix Rate Efficiency!
HMMMMMM!
Now I realize some here will rightfully say these are unconfirmed figures
and they are correct. However they have much more credibility for me
than the assumptions I saw thrown around in the past about what MD's
technology could and could not do, what percentages of efficiency they
could achieve, etc., etc.. Esping is a lot closer to the situation than us (?)
and these figures, at least for me, provide some insight to MD's product.
Also they must have some realistic relationship between where the product
was at the time of the contract and the goals set forth in the contract.
Your own intelligence must agree that getting from here to there is possible!!
Yes, NO!! What say yeee? Off with his head! ! Sorry, that's something else.
OK, Here we go;
<"Page 30
(e) PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. The conditions of subsections (ii) (A),
(iii) (A) and (iv) (B) of Section 4 (c) shall be satisfied if the Company
shall have the ability to perform Year 2000 conversions commercially
at the rate of at least 44 Million Lines of Code ("MLOC") per month, with
production cost, scan efficiency and fix rate meeting the specifications
applicable to the month of exercise of the Put Options as set forth in the
following table;
Mo. of Exer.---------- Prod. $ per------- Scan Efficy.--------- Fix Rate =-----------------------LOC------------GRTR THAN-------GRTR THAN---
Jan 97 ------------------$0.025----------0.99900--------------0.9980
Feb........................$0.023..........0.99930..............0.9985
Mar........................$0.020..........0.99960..............0.9990
April........................$0.018.........0.99990..............0.9993
sorry about the alignment.
I'm back. Couple of observations & opinions, IMO;
1. Naysayers may say the 44MIL LOC/Mo. aren't close to the claimed
1MIL/LOC/hr, but I say it's obviously fast enough for Esping AND it was not
Esping's concern since detailing goals for it was not done. And if you check
the numbers it's right up there with Peritus and Alydaar? Check it out.
2. What was of more importance to Esping was the accuracy and efficiency
of their product AND the production cost. That's not a quarter per line folks,
that's 2 1/2 pennies! ! !
3. If they are close to these numbers AND can their product to offer maintenance
services beyond the year 2k, then yes, I could see how an IBM might just be
interested. Even if they're not I think eventually the market will be interested in
what they've got. Again these are just my opinions and hopefully will generate
some responses maybe even some about the meeting!
That's it. Have at it folks. Going to the movies and look forward to what will be
awaiting me here when I return. Ta Ta ! ! !
Bye M.M.
D/D |
