I maybe spent 10 minutes talking to Mr. Rauber.  

I maybe spent 10 minutes talking to Mr. Rauber.  I spent longer talking to the CO, er, the CFO.

What I got from Mr. Rauber was this: He wants to be known as a man of his word.

So I take his CFP Q1 2013 very seriously.

Now we wait to see if that can be achieved.

Matt was pleasant to talk with, but did not share anything that he wouldn't have shared with any other shareholder.  In other words, he didn't share any non-public information. That's a good thing.

What kind of information would you expect officers of a public company to share with one person that would provide them with something that wasn't already known?

They didn't and shouldn't.

My biggest gripe is the company not being transparent about the true state of the technology and the business operations. We are left with only the reality of the bottom line presented in the quarterly filings. And we all know how that looks.

I would like them to tell us the problems they are facing with the technology and the confidence they have that they can be addressed, and how much the solution with add to the cost of processing.

Clearly they will not do that and all the posters here seem to support that position. I have no idea why that is OK with people who have money invested.

I do realize that they have been working hard to address the issues.  I know that there are a lot of good engineers working on the issues.

I have no idea how confident they are that they can achieve anywhere near the numbers that they have been declaring.

There always seems to be something new that needs addressing. Some of that is to be expected. But who here is really satisfied that they have not been generating revenue with the technology that they had already developed?

Clearly the problems were much bigger than they were telling their shareholders.

And, for all we know at this time, they still are.

We'll all find out soon enough if Mr. Rauber can achieve the goal he stated to me during our brief chat.