Member Info for HeadInTheSand

buko, IMO any delays in H-4 becoming operational is already built into the existing contractual payment terms, with final payment ($40m I believe?) only becoming due following successful in-orbit testing. So that final payment's timing already takes into account any delay, if you see what I mean. cassius, I suspect you're right to do nothing and wait and see. Hell, it's what I'm doing.. but WTFDIK 2?

PS two other things occur.... 1. I've not even checked back through AGM resolutions to see if the AVN BoD has the requisite authority to issue a billion new shares (if that's what it decides to do)... but they probably have. 2. They (again probably) have a little more wiggle room (but not much) past the self-imposed June 30th deadline. The big fat elephant in the room is the $40m they're gonna owe immediately upon successful in-orbit testing on H4 being completed. That's probably not until mid- to end July, so they may have 2 or 3 weeks longer to get things sorted (presuming there's no other angry creditors looking to storm the AVN offices already).

cassius, it's the only means I can think of that allows AVN to get the $50-$90m fast. I just can't see them re-utilising bonds again, so soon after they've managed to wipe out $550m of those in the recent D4E swap - and I can't come up with any other viable/sensible means of securing funding. (Please God no CLNs and death spirals... that really would be the orchestra warming up for SS's fat lady). Yep it would be a massive further dilution. A billion - or 50% more - shares in issue looks like what'd be needed to hit the required funding level and that would indeed equal a 33% dilution. But that looks roughly like what it'd take, if my pure guesstimate on the price of a purely hypothetical imminent placing is anywhere near accurate. You do what you think is for the best, buddy - you're every bit as clued up as me. Me? I am sitting firmly on my hands and doing precisely nothing for the next three weeks - but my position is bound to be different from yours.

Again, Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure are just cloud-based technology platforms, offering "fill in what you like here" as a service. Any data collected through and stored on said technology platforms would be owned by whoever collected the data and decided to store it on those cloud(s)... and not MS or Amazon.

By "owned the device", I mean "whoever owned the IP of the implemented device used to collect said data". For example, Facebook undoubtedly runs its systems on someone else's manufactured hardware (whether HP servers, Dell servers or whoever). It undoubtedly uses someone else's operating systems (Windows? Unix?) on those servers. However, it's Facebook that owns the collected data - or even someone operating at a level one step lower down on Facebook's provided social media platform (cf Cambridge Analytics).

WM, I would imagine that the data would be owned (subject to user permission having been received - even moreso now, what with GDPR) by whoever owned the device (and not the technology) used to collect it.

I could go into a long diatribe on subjective realities here and start referencing Descartes among others, but will spare everyone. Suffice it to say that, in as much as a shape is vaguely discernible amid the ever-present speculative fog, to me it's still way WAY more quack than meow, I'm afraid. However, each to his/her own... Regardless, I think we'd all agree it's about time someone turned the bloody lights on.

PS This is why I tend to be a bit OCD with words. The devil is always in the detail and contractually, it's crucial to have things locked down with no possibility of wider interpretation or wiggle room, if such is not intended. Anyhow, that's my excuse.

WM, I can help here. Purely factually, legally and semantically speaking... and over the last couple of decades I've spent a good deal of my time going through, amending and sometimes creating contracts in the IT-related space... "...IMEC's proprietary algorithm..." There is zero legal/contractual doubt or wiggle room in terms of what that phrase means. It solely, strictly, clearly and categorically states that the algorithm being referred to in that phrase is the sole wholly owned intellectual property of IMEC, However... As stated before, I am aware that Cloudtag was granted a "worldwide, exclusive and perpetual" licence to a tweaked version of one of IMEC's algorithms. In this particular case, things are a little less clear, without seeing the smallprint of whatever the licence agreement says. The core IP on which tweaks were made would of course remain entirely IMEC's. In my experience - for whatever that's worth - I would further almost guarantee that the modified IP ALSO remains IMEC's, BUT that CTAG - AND ONLY CTAG - is allowed to use it in whatever iterations are jointly agreed and covered off by said licence agreement. To me, the above is crystal clear. However, if you'd like a speculative bone tossed your way chew on, it is possible - though it would be slightly unusual (again down to the specific Ts & Cs of the licence agreement as signed by IMEC and CTAG) - that CTAG might have sub-licensing rights over said tweaked IP.

Doug, I've never had the least issue with speculation or assumption, provided it's presented as such and doesn't at all pretend to be conclusive penny-dropping evidence of something concrete. Seeing the latter still being rolled out admittedly gets me miffed. I could make a speculative case for CTAG being busy developing something of potential real value and I could make a speculative case for CTAG being dormant, largely inactive and having nothing at all of any value... Okay, I know which case I personally would find it easier to make, given the sketchy foundations upon which to build such. However - as you equally know - the sole hard fact is that, whatever case is made, right now and until something significantly changes, it'd still inevitably be pure speculation and nothing more.

Okay... I clearly have no earthly idea about what's going on with AVN. It's all entirely counter-intuitive, from where I'm standing. Fact remains, I'd still be massively grateful for a confirmed RNS from the BoD stating clearly a) that it has and b) how it has resolved its pressing short-term funding needs. Apart from that, I'm not going to speculate - not buying, selling or even theorizing. I'll just sit on my hands for the next 3 or so weeks.

I'm not sure what I can add here... and remember having largely this same discussion on IMEC at the back end of 2016, when some of the then ramptastic squad (but please note, nobody currently posting) were very busily trying to put forward the untruth that CTAG had a "perpetual, worldwide and exclusive" licence to core IMEC IP. IMEC's technology pedigree is impeccable. No doubt in my mind about it. However, all that CTAG licensed was a tweaked version of IMEC IP - which obviously gave CTAG no rights at all to ownership - part or full - of the core IMEC IP. I have no idea whether there is any continuing relationship between CTAG and IMEC or not. It would certainly seem true that, as long as CTAG exists, that licensing deal that was signed would still be in force (for whatever that's worth) - but I've seen no evidence from anyone to show that both companies are continuing to dialogue and work together in some development-oriented sort of way. It is of course possible that they are - but to my knowledge, there's no hard evidence to support this, so we're back to either hopeful assumption or cynical assumption, depending which way you lean.

...and the award for this year's most valuable post so far goes to wasred. Hats off to you... I almost shed an appreciative tear. Absolutely right. Last time I looked, the language was called English, so we get to make the call on what's correct. So, you do indeed need to be licensed to drive and get a driving licence to prove it. Similarly, dentists practise dentistry at a dental practice. Here's a simple way of remembering... advise and advice. You know which of those is the verb and which the noun. Same rule, same spelling. This has been a public information announcement... :D

WO, if I'm right about an imminent placing - and I can't think of any other way AVN can realistically raise the required short-term funding after its chequered recent history - then I think you'll achieve your top-up price level pretty soon. If there is a placing just around the corner, I reckon placement price would be around 4.25p, give or take 5%. If news of such has already leaked to "mates", that would explain today's sharp SP move south. All pure guesswork.

Now you're just being silly. Of course there's a link, as we both know. CTAG licensed a tweaked version of IMECs' algorithms. However, that doesn't give CTAG any ownership of IMEC's core IP - hence my not seeing any specific relevance to CTAG in the indisputable fact that IMEC is an impressive tech company.

WM, no need to feel honoured. Just because I (so far) have found every link you've posted to have no specific relevance to CTAG - and before you go into one, that's just my opinion - doesn't mean that I'll ignore links people (including you) post with claims that they are relevant. Why would I? That'd be dumb, surely? I prefer to take at least a look at any alleged evidence... after all, eyes wide open makes for better judgement than eyes tight shut, no?

Not loving today's retrace... unless news of an imminent rights issue has leaked, I'd then consider that encouraging. C'mon BoD... we need hard news on how you've sorted out the company's immediate funding needs.

I personally doubt whether any pivot point is approaching - but then again, I suppose I would, wouldn't I? There has been a small surge of activity in people posting of links which both say and evidence things like "Biotech is going to be a major growth industry" (I agree completely) or "IMEC's a really interesting company with shedloads of good IP" (again I agree completely) - but purely personally speaking, I see no specific relevance to CTAG in any of those. So I suppose everyone will carry on sitting on their hands and carry on waiting. H1 is almost done - H2, anyone?

WM, you do like to accidentally bait me. Feel free to take it as a compliment if you like - but in so doing, you're showing a good deal of ambition. Well done. DougB, loving the bifingual neologism.

To this day, I can still only type with both index fingers and still have to look at the keyboard. Occasionally remember to use a thumb on the spacebar, but that's it. It's pathetic, really...