Hey Saintnik - Not sure what you're calling wrong. I completely...

Hey Saintnik -

Not sure what you're calling wrong. I completely agree that there is a beginning to everything (of course there is) and "everything has to start somewhere". And I for one am extremely happy with the start we've made. I know you are too.

However what I'm getting at is that I'm challenging the line of thought where people believe that Intel needs to make an SEC announcement/filing that we are working with them.

As revolutionary, ground breaking, world changing etc, as our tech might be unfortunately it's still unproven (in terms of market acceptance) and we are a company with zero revenues. Why on earth would Intel, a $150billion market cap company, announce to the investment community that we are working with them? IMO they'd only make that kind of announcement if they believed that we'd make a material impact on their results. Which means they are forecasting a bare minimum $275m in additional revenues thanks to Xped. And even if they forecast that, the requirement to announce is loose at best unless it well and truly clears that revenue mark.

I have my fingers and toes crossed hoping that they do forecast this and make an announcement as it'd mean great things for the price of our shares, but I have less than zero expectations that they would. Just doesn't make sense to me.

As I mentioned in a previous post, if Intel actually invested in us $80m (our entire market cap) it's equivalent to someone with a $10,000 net worth making a public announcement whenever they purchase a $5 scratchy. Personally, I don't see the point of that and furthermore they haven't even actually invested in us.

And just for people's learning sake -- the $275m materiality threshold I quoted is conservative and based on 0.5% of Intel's $55b in revenues last year. (Which one of the standard metrics for determining materiality in the financial accounting world is 0.5%-1% of total revenues)

All IMO and dyor.