(Total Views: 305)
Posted On: 03/23/2018 1:00:25 PM
Post# of 82686
Re: ace thompson #21422
If the thinking 2 years ago hypothetically was to prep for a buyout, do you feel the resolution of the patent infringement litigation would have been the main precondition, or would showing significant revenues have also been in the mix as well?
Skip forward to now. It seems that significant revenues may be on the near-term horizon. If there are more licensing deals going on now than there were 2 years ago, I would expect a more competitive environment now for those wishing to own the IP. I would think that the views and targets of 2 years ago, whatever they were, would have to be adjusted.
When I attempt to gauge the size of the market for StrikeForce, the exercise leads me to consider valuations that are very far away from the current situation. I think it's better to get the revenue ball picking up steam before SFOR lets a big player have the ball.
Skip forward to now. It seems that significant revenues may be on the near-term horizon. If there are more licensing deals going on now than there were 2 years ago, I would expect a more competitive environment now for those wishing to own the IP. I would think that the views and targets of 2 years ago, whatever they were, would have to be adjusted.
When I attempt to gauge the size of the market for StrikeForce, the exercise leads me to consider valuations that are very far away from the current situation. I think it's better to get the revenue ball picking up steam before SFOR lets a big player have the ball.
(3)
(0)
There are no guarantees in investing. No one should consider these pages or posts to be financial advice. Everyone has a responsibility to verify and thoroughly learn more than what is referenced or written here, and everyone must take responsibility for their own investing decisions.
