Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Identix (IDNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jean who wrote (9854)	8/9/1998 9:58:00 PM
From: David	Respond to of 26039

Re: Identicator as an IPO . . . . My $7 million revenue figure comes from a Nexus database for privately held corporations. I think I saw it confirmed somewhere else, as well. You can be pretty sure that the Nexus information did not include anything with Compaq or Mastercard, but only Identicator's long term sales in their main lines of business, inkless fingerprint pads and the like. It's an error to assume $7 million in bio-ID. Today, I would think there is virtually nothing in bio-ID revenues from Mastercard or Compaq; the best you could hope for is an NRID-like arrangement with Who?Vision with a relatively modest advance payment on the Compaq stuff. Identix bio-ID revenues today have to include foreign bank and California prison security sales, and I'm sure there will be some O'Hare pilot revenues reported eventually. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see about $10 million in bank/prison bio-ID in FY99, and that isn't relying at all on IDX hitting a home run with an Oracle pilot. I would be very surprised if Identicator has $10 million in revenues in FY99 for supplying an algorithm component to the modest Compaq biometric add-on. However, I am not particularly relying on revenue comparisons as much as potential applications for the two companies. Identicator's technical ambitions seem pretty modest to me at this point. I do agree that the bio-ID market is still up for grabs at this point. In fact, I'd go further and say that there is still no proof that there is a major bio-ID market out there. That is the biggest question mark for me with IDX's prospects. By the way, I was at a wedding today and sat next to someone who had just left a long-term marketing PR position at MCI. She used to go around with the CFO and talk to Wall Street analysts for them. According to her, accurate targeting of your potential client base is absolutely critical, much more important than pricing. This helps me make some sense of Fowler's strange emphasis in the CC that IDX had made a great deal of progress in "targetting" Oracle sales.