10 years ago this stock was 24 cents

5 years ago this stock was 3 cents

4 years ago this stock was 18 cents

2 years ago this stock was 12 cents

now this stock is 4 cents and we have settled with Apple and Google among many others

He makes more now and less back 10 years ago,  but let's just say that Fred has averaged about $165,000 per year for the last 10 years plus health care benefits.  We, the stockholders in this company, have paid him $1,650,000 for these results.  Please thumb this post only if you believe that YOU personally would be embarrased every time that you cash your pay check if you were the CEO of the company.

DABOSS I agree.  However, if I read your original post correctly, GIS can want to move forward with this deal but the Chinese government can stop the deal if they want--no?  Also, the huge increase in  Chinese investment in the U.S. in 2016 is a reflection of the Chinese businessmen and women getting rich over the past several years and now trying to get their money out of the country when they can before the you know what hits the fan economically.  Their whole economy is artifically managed by the government, they are novices in having a capitalist like system and could easily screw it up, IMO.

So as good as the GIS deal sounds, it is just a MOU and we really do not have anything unless and until the definitive agreement is signed(within 90 days of the MOU) and the $6 million is put(within 30 days of the signing of the definitive agreement)

Unfortunately a Google search for "IOT Security"or "IOT sensor technology management" produce nothing mentioning eDigiital for an unknown number of pages (I did not go deeper than 10 pages. Yet, there are prime positioned ads by bigger names that show up first. Wonder how much that placement cost them... 

Just to clarify and I originally misunderstood this concept.  There is no reason for the name Edigital to show up anywhere in relation to Google products.  After we sued Google, Nest, and DropCam, they asked for an Inter Parte Review of our patents to (once again) determine their legitamacy and patentability as a negotiating posture and delay tactic.  While the IPR was moving toward a hearing, Edig and Google signed a settlement and licensing agreement.  This statement was on the information site for the IPR which said that the IPR was being cancelled because of the settlement.  That comment was up on the site for a short time and taken down.  Edig never announced the settlement and licensing agreement to the public by way of a press release.  Were it not for some sharp people on this board, we would not know that it actually happened.  Certainly the world outside this board does not know.  Why it was handled this way?  IMO, NDA's are a lame excuse, unless, of course WE insisted on the NDA.  Why would Edig do this?  IF the settlement was embarassingly small, they would not want future infringers to know the terms.  Not saying that it was, we do not know.  Edig has not publically declared any income from the settlement and licensing agreement as of this date.  

A little history that I believe to be true.  Fred used to meet with stockholders on a somewhat regular basis in the company's offices.  A few years ago, on the advice of I believe his SEC advisor, he declined to meet with stockholders on a one on one basis anymore.  Being geographically close is of no benefit.

His email is ffalk@edigital.com.  He reads his emails and will sometimes respond.  Not with any information, but basically acknowleges receipt of the correspondance.  I would suggest that you email him with your thoughts and concerns.

I do not know where Let Go Joe got this information that he posted today, but, for me, this is the key to this company's survival and chance to prosper in the future.  I believe that the two new board members can provide knowlege and expertise that the company lacked.

Our new Board members are helping to refine our strategic direction with regard to not only our smart home product but also our microSignet and Synap technologies. Our legal team will continue to enforce our patents against companies we believe infringe our Nunchi intellectual property,” concluded Falk

 is if there is ongoing revenue from the Google settlement and the size, and structure, of the settlements with larger companies going forward.

IF is the critical word