cguilfor... Of all the posts I’ve read today, I think yours most closely matches my own feelings about this latest PR. I was also thinking about the "deck chairs" analogy. Not that EDIG is going down like the Titanic, but it doesn’t take 9-12 months or more to reorganize a small company.

Consider this: Today’s PR did not reveal anything specific or sensitive and could just as easily been released back in October without changing a single word in it - only the date.

I am not surprised at all that this PR did not meet any high expectations though it did not even meet my own which were probably lower than most. I thought they at least would have announced something tangible and more specific after all the lead up (even if it wasn’t that great). Instead, we got to see how clever they were in coming up with E.Digital Innovations Group... the initials are E-D-I-G, get it? Big deal. We.Dig Music. We.Deserve better.

Something that trillium posted a few weeks back had given me pause but I never commented on it:

I didn't get much insight from my conversation with Putnam when I talked with him a couple of weeks ago. What little guidance provided indicated that PR's would be forthcoming when things are finalized. It also sounded like they were expecting to announce the filing of additional patents this quarter. Only indication as to when was when Pat Nunally finished the filing and was prepared to submit.

The above statements seemed rather casual and dismissive coming from RP when compared to public statements that had been made in recent (and last February’s) PRs. As the days wore on, I started to wonder if we had been reading too much into "elements", "material events", or "new business developments". RP seemed to be suggesting "Oh, whenever Pat gets around to it", or "Ya, nothing is finalized yet"... but how could that be when they’d all but guaranteed announcements by the end of the quarter? Was the company over-promising again or were we reading too much into their statements? Could we be attaching too much significance to the forthcoming PRs? Turns out that we were (at least for the time being).

It looks to me now like they are simply hoping that they can sell whatever they produce, rather than producing something for which they already have a buyer. Maybe there IS a partnership/buyer for some new technology that’s been developed and it’s been delayed, but we’ve seen no real indication of that as yet... not even a hint.

Regarding Summit, I think that TOMMEEEK was right about what he said last night:

I am very suspicious of this motion...Does this mean that they will not have to participate in the Markman, only to possibly reap results, if it goes against us?? Sounds like it!

Essentially it looks like Summit will be getting the benefit of settling early before the Markman in case it goes our way, but if the judge decides for the defendants, they would also benefit since the agreement would not have been finalized and would probably be modified following such decision. Actually pretty smart on the part of Summit. They appear to be covered either way. If I’m right, then I wonder if DM will agree to make this same sort of arrangement with others? On one hand it would seem to defeat the purpose of a negotiating strategy that is hinged on a potentially favorable Markman decision; but on the other hand, it may be just a creative means to secure more settlements. Interesting.

- Sinkman