Euclid Discoveries Files 15th Patent Application
Posted by John Scally on 21st December 2005 | Permanent Link
Press Release: Euclid Discoveries, a developer of video compression enabling technologies, is pleased to announce the completion of the most recent of 15 patent filings with U.S. and international agencies.
These filings specifically cover “Apparatus and Method for Processing Video Data.” The patents stake the Euclid Discoveries’ claim to key enabling discoveries in computer vision and image understanding – technological underpinnings of future breakthroughs in video compression.
“We have spent a great deal of time and money safeguarding our discoveries with U.S. and international patent filings,” said Euclid Discoveries CEO and co-founder Richard Wingard. “Euclid Discoveries’ value – like that of most startup technology companies – is tied up in its intellectual property, and it was critical for us to vigorously protect our groundbreaking discoveries.”
The patent applications lay an intellectual property foundation for Euclid Discoveries that supports the advanced algorithmic innovations yielding unprecedented compression ratios for video. Ultimately, this technology will let users utilize mobile devices like cell phones for high-definition video conferencing, or use an iPod for storing hundreds of full-length, high-quality movies.
Twelve of these filings have been with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and three of those twelve have been for Regular Patent Applications. In conjunction with these filings, the company has also registered claims with the World Intellectual Property Organization under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). These claims preserve Euclid Discoveries’ rights to file individual patent applications with each of the 128 PCT member states.
“Euclid Discoveries’ prides itself on being as thorough and timely in its filings as any firm in the technology space,” said Bentley Pace, Knowledge Manager of Euclid Discoveries. “In the current environment, a company’s value can be made or broken on the basis of its intellectual property protection and documentation. The stakes are high for Euclid Discoveries knowledge group, and we can accept nothing less than comprehensive protection.”
About Euclid Discoveries
Euclid Discoveries researches and develops next-generation video processing and compression technology. In order to meet consumer demand for high quality video on any video-enabled device, the company developed EuclidVision™. EuclidVision is a proprietary technology, based on the MPEG-4 standard, that will increase video compression ratios by orders of magnitude - reducing file size dramatically and removing existing bandwidth constraints for the transmission of high quality video. This technology has clear potential applications in a host of industries beyond consumer electronics and telecommunications including medical imaging, weather forecasting and image mining. Euclid Discoveries has also developed a rigorous testing environment, EuclidStudio™, to accurately evaluate video compression and quality for MPEG-4 compression technologies. For more information on Euclid Discoveries and its offerings, please visit www.eucliddiscoveries.com.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:37 am
Having followed Euclid over the years it would appear they have finally succeded in developing compression technologies that many other companies have promised, but faild to produce.
December 28th, 2005 at 10:39 am
They state in the press release their technology is based on MPEG-4. Doesn’t sound all the groundbreaking to me.
January 1st, 2006 at 9:44 am
I totally disagree Jim, If somebody were to invent a new operating system that was multiple orders of magnitude superior than windows but would run on a PC. It is worth much more that someone who invents a new operating systmen that has to run on a totally new platform or machine. It is going to be a tough sell when everybody already has PC. It took my daughter 43 minutes to download one episode of Desperate Housewives to her Apple video Ipod and costs $2. Euclid will allow that to happen in seconds. Pretty groundbreaking to me. If somebody could invent a fuel that would make your car run 5 times further on the same amount without changing the engine that is significant in my book. Just my thoughts.
January 9th, 2006 at 9:58 am
Actually Euclid’s technology which indeed is groundbreaking, was developed to work with, and to integrate seemlessly within the MPEG-4 standard.
January 14th, 2006 at 10:49 am
I call into question the bona fides of Jimmy T and TinyAngel. I would ask that both of your state whether or not you have a dog in this fight. If not, I apologize for being sensitive. If you do, however, please get it out in the open.
January 14th, 2006 at 1:41 pm
Not a problem - I’ve had a big dog in Euclid for a long time.
January 14th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
I’m in. It’s a private company, totally sold out. Were not trying to influence anybody. Just stimulating conversation.
January 16th, 2006 at 11:01 am
Thanks for being straight! While Euclid is privately held, at least for a time I found that the shares were being pretty aggressively peddled to folks who were not really capable of evaluating the technology - this was several years ago. Euclid then made a bit of a splash with some announcements, but in my view failed to follow through with anything of interest. Hearing promises of new activity leaves me skeptical.
January 16th, 2006 at 2:00 pm
Mark. Do you think this company is capable of this technology now, as they claim? Or do you think this type of compression-1000dvds on 1dvd-is possible? Thank you.
January 16th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
Do you think Euclid will go public anytime soon?
January 18th, 2006 at 9:38 am
Considering some of the most recent postings and concerns, perhaps the following need to be considered:
1. On December 21, 2005 Euclid filed their 15th patent application: http://www.c10n.info/archives/289#comments
You don’t attempt to bring a product to market until you are sure your product is secure.
2. As you will note from Euclid’s web site they have two of the top-rated law firms in the country for patent filing and litigation, and CRA International, a world wide consulting organization in the economic ($) evaluation and marketing of intellectual properties. Click on their respective logos.
3. While B & R may have had the best intentions with the information at hand at any given time, I think we can all agree that once the attorneys get involved time slows down.
4. In any company there is always a requirement for a quiet period leading up to the end.
January 18th, 2006 at 10:35 am
You guys might like to join our blog at http://www.corante.com/mooreslore/archives/2005/09/09/angel_investors_in_america.php#32297 There is alot of activity and it is picking up. JimmyT I took the liberty of posting you last post to that blog. It was interesting and informative, I hope you don’t mind if you do I apologize in advance for the indiscretion
January 31st, 2006 at 9:36 am
>Mark. Do you think this company is capable of this >echnology now, as they claim? Or do you think this >type of compression-1000dvds on 1dvd-is possible?
I can’t figure out what Euclid says they are doing, what they are promising, or what they are planning to deliver.
Point by point, I think everything Jimmy T says in his comments is pretty shaky.
1) Filing patent applications doesn’t mean a thing. And by the time the posting is made public, a company could already be shipping product. The fact that you see the app and there is no product shipping is a red flag.
2) The only requirement for a “quiet period” is one imposed by the SEC leading up to an IPO. I don’t believe Euclid is in that situation. Quiet at this point means nothing.
February 1st, 2006 at 10:34 am
Mark, Euclid has no intention of shipping a product. They are only selling the intellectual property. That has always been thier exit stratetgy. In the very near future, you will be seeing what they have to offer, it will become public. This is a private company that was financed by Angels. It is fully subscribed and entering the home stretch of introducing and auctioning the IP. They are not subject to SEC , VC or public policies, except to the purchasing company or companies. Everybody just has to wait to see what they really have, how much it is worth and who if anybody purchases what they are offering for sale.
February 1st, 2006 at 12:20 pm
Mark - sorry if you took my comments as a reference to an “IPO” quiet period. My reference to a quiet period was in reference to most businesses that are in the process of conducting a major transaction. Management, if smart, will always keep it’s stratgy close to it’s vest (including from their investors) for a variety of reasons. Everything tiny angel said in her post is absolutly correct. As was noted in my earlier post - — Euclid is selling intellectual propertieS.
March 7th, 2006 at 9:31 pm
Ive heard its going to be sold for $50billion soon.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:56 am
Yes, I believe you.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:05 pm
Anybody hear anything, since the Corante blog went down?
March 8th, 2006 at 3:51 pm
Hey GeorigiaPeachAngel, maybe now that the other blog went down you are doing internet searches for Euclid Discoveries, if you are how is Greece? No real news on the home front as far as ED.
March 9th, 2006 at 7:23 pm
Tiny, bless your heart. Yes, I’ve been trying my best to find some news about Euclid Discoveries. The website hasn’t been updated as far as I can tell. My son-in-law did tell me we got a large envelope from Euclid at home, but when I told him to open it he said it wasn’t anything earth-shattering. I’m assuming the other blog died. Greece is marvelous! The weather is lovely and my granchildren are basking in the sun daily. I’m having a ball and just trusting that everything’s OK with Euclid. I must say that the “guesstimate” for the sales price above is much better than I’ve been told. The figures I heard were only about a tenth of that. It would suit me fine if it sells for $50 billion!!!!!
March 9th, 2006 at 7:32 pm
Joe, where did you get your information about the $50 billion sales price? That’s a bit more inflated than I’ve heard. Hope your sources are correct!
March 10th, 2006 at 6:24 am
I think he was being facetious.
March 10th, 2006 at 10:45 am
Right now I would be very surprised if Euclid was worth anything. Compare it to a company like On2 Technologies or DivX. In both cases, these companies have very good video codecs, and are marketing the heck out of them. It takes a ton of work and resources, and still neither one of them has ever hit anything but a single. This is a tough business to win in (see Microsoft’s attempts) and really the only sure path to modest success is via the standards process.
Euclid is relying on that old business fallacy that if they just cook up a good idea, somebody else will snap it up and do all the hard work. But the truth is, good ideas are pretty cheap.
With no product revenues and what must be a big payroll, Euclid either has to sell more shares or quietly close the doors and go home - or sell their mysterious IP to a mysterious white knight.
Doesn’t look good to me!
March 10th, 2006 at 9:43 pm
Mark, what is your interest in Euclid? Do you actually know what they have and are you speaking from personal knowledge that what they have is worthless or just speculating. If you have not seen what they have and cannot attest to the fact that it is worthless, then why not wait and see rather than predict gloom and doom. If your dog isn’t in this fight, why should you even wish to post negative comments?
March 12th, 2006 at 7:00 pm
I post negative comments about Euclid because of the many sad emails I have received over the years from people who foolishly invested in the company. I use the word foolishly because they knew nothing of the technology but bought in on the strength of a sales pitch.
I don’t like seeing a company do business that way, and nothing I see so far makes me thing anything has changed.
As for why predict gloom and doom, I’m doing no such thing. I am predicting that they are not going to do anything of interest. The only gloom and doom in that is for the stockholders. But talking about stuff like that is what this blog is all about.
March 13th, 2006 at 6:44 am
Mark, in an earlier comment, you called into question the bona fides of Jimmy T and myself. In the interest of full disclosure who are you (not asking your real name) and why have you recieved “many sad E-mails”? For someone who does not have a dog in this fight you seem highly invested in the foolishness of this company and its investors. Just wondering what your connection is to the investors who apparently are in contact with you on a regular basis.
March 13th, 2006 at 7:55 pm
Man, all you have to do is click on the link on the front page, and it will take you here:
http://www.marknelson.us/
The sad emails come from people who do a google search on “Data Compression” and pop up my name based on either my books or articles on the topic.
>For someone who does not have a dog in this
>fight you seem highly invested in the foolishness
>of this company and its investors
Just because I have no stake in the outcome does not mean I should not be concerned. One of the great strengths of the economic system in the US is the fact that we try to play it straight. Things like bribery, dishonesty, and fraud are fairly vigorously pursued by the authorities. I happen to think that this gives us a HUGE advantage over countries where corruption and fraud are endemic.
So yeah, I care.
Now, as I have said many times, I don’t know what Euclid has, because they have disclosed nothing. However, their pattern of imminent disclosures followed by pulling back and failing to produce anything fits a certain pattern, and it is not a happy one.
Until shown otherwise, Euclid has no assets of any kind, and those who invested in the company have NOTHING - their shares have no value whatsoever. For that situation to change, Euclid would have to demonstrate that they have some assets - and at this time they are electing to not disclose anything of the sort.
March 14th, 2006 at 6:39 am
Mark, since you admit you don’t know what Euclid has, why assume that what they have is worthless? Perhaps all of us investors ARE foolish, but we believe that the team of experts they have assembled, as well as the technology they have developed is worthwhile. Do you believe that the law firms and investment analysts they have hired would put their reputations on the line if what Euclid has is worthless?
March 14th, 2006 at 7:27 am
Mark, thanks for your comments, and obviously your expertise. It is always nice to know that you are motivated by your experience and knowledge rather than a disgruntled investor. I agree with you, it is worth nothing, until someone comes up with a number and is willing to pay that. I believe that is in the works, and will present intself in the next couple of months. Will just have to wait and see. I hope you are wrong. Finally just so you are aware one had to be an accredited investor with over a million in assets or 200K single and 300K annual income. The placement memorandum has mutlipe warnings of significant risk and is not suitable for many investors. Anybody who invested in this company was given adequate information and ample warnings.
March 14th, 2006 at 9:49 am
>you are motivated by your experience
>and knowledge rather than a disgruntled investor.
There is only one company dependent on compression for the majority of it’s earnings that looks like a good bet, and unfortunately, that would be Forgent. :-)
March 14th, 2006 at 2:56 pm
You invested based on reputations of law firms and investment analysts they hired? Ouch!
March 14th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
No, when we invested there were no lawyers or investment analysts hired. I may be from Georgia, but I’m not stupid!!!! We bought in based on the information given us about the technology they were trying to develop and also on the reputation of Richard because we had a mutual acquaintance who highly recommended him.
March 14th, 2006 at 5:26 pm
Are there any technical experts in their team with whose names we may be familiar with?
March 14th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
>We bought in based on the information given us
>about the technology they were trying to develop
>and also on the reputation of Richard because
>we had a mutual acquaintance who highly
>recommended him.
Unfortunately, this has all the makings of a very unwise investment. Unless you or the mutual acquaintance had two things, you made a mistake:
1) Very specific knowledge about the technical breakthroughs that were going to make Euclid a success. As in algorithms.
2) The technical ability to evaluate that specific knowledge.
At no time have I heard from anyone who invested in Euclid who was in possession of either number 1 or number 2.
March 14th, 2006 at 9:21 pm
Lead Software Engineer Renato Pizzorni
Lead Algorithmic Engineer Darin DeForest, PhD(ABD)
Chief Algorithmic Mathematician John Weiss, PhD
Chief Consulting Mathematician Michael Kirby, PhD
Chief Consulting Scientist Amit Roy-Chowdhury, PhD
March 15th, 2006 at 9:38 am
Mark, you are to be admired for your knowledge of compression technology. But I have to believe that you have no real expertise in investing. One does not have to be an expert in what a company does to make a wise investment in that company. If you invest in the stock market, you can make a good decision based upon the need of the product they produce, their track record and reputation. That’s what many if not most of us have done. Many of those who have invested in this are well aware of the need for what they have developed and personally know either Bob or Richard. If they did not have good reputations and solid track records, we would not have given them our money.
Stop comparing Euclid to the many phonies from the past. I understand your doubts, but you’re not taking the time to look at the credentials of Euclid and the backgrounds of the persons that are involved. I think you’ll find that they all have solid backgrounds and are well respected in their fields.
By the way, I’m the person that you quoted from in your “Euclid Redux” on 12/03.
March 15th, 2006 at 1:00 pm
>based upon the need of the product they produce
Of course, that logic can get you in trouble if your business is claiming to spin straw into gold. Yes, there is a big need for gold, but it doesn’t mean you should invest in the company. In a case like that, you would want to be very sure you understood that the company had a valid process for doing just that - if you simply take them at their word, well, you are a chump.
>Stop comparing Euclid to the many phonies from the past.
I don’t believe I have done so.
But remember, at one time they publicly announced that they were going to be launching their 10x product in January, 2004. Shortly after that they backpedaled, didn’t release anything, and started talking about working with MPEG-4. Now they seem to be shifting to a strategy of selling object/facial recognition.
To Richard, I say congratulations for hanging on to your investors money for seven years while yet to produce a product. But what happens when the money runs out?
March 16th, 2006 at 11:04 am
Why are all you investors silent? Did this thread blew away your remaining hopes of recovering your lost money? ;-)
March 16th, 2006 at 11:41 am
What kind of idiot takes pleasure in the possiblity of people losing their money? I am not so sure that anyone has lost any of their money yet. We will see who has the last laugh.
March 16th, 2006 at 11:54 am
I haven’t given up hope of getting a sizeable return on my investment. And, even though Mark seems to think we’re all a bunch of stupid, naive, gullible….you name it…investors, I think we will eventually receive our just reward for our patience and our belief in Euclid Discoveries. Just because Euclid hasn’t given Mark the “insider information” on what they have doesn’t mean that they don’t have a viable and saleable product that could be of benefit to multiple users. So, even though I’m out of the country, I’m keeping up with what’s going on and trying to think positively about our investment. Mark, even your negative comments can’t ruin my well-deserved vacation!!!
March 17th, 2006 at 7:33 am
>What kind of idiot takes pleasure in the possiblity
>of people losing their money?
I haven’t noticed any glee from anyone in this long thread. I also think the use of the term “idiot” is uncalled for. I think the closest thing to a pejorative that I have used is the word “foolish”, used when speaking of specific people who contacted me with buyer’s remorse after investing in Euclid.
Those of you who ware investors, I’m curious. Have you been getting an audited balance sheet every year?
March 17th, 2006 at 7:52 am
Mark, I truly understand and respect your comments you put forward from an “outsiders” perspective! If I were you, I think I would view Euclid and prospect of anything coming to market the same. At the same time, we have info(although somewhat limited) that lends to our optimistic view. If we’ve foolishly invested, so be it and I hope my peers realize it was always a very risky investment. If we lose everything, bummer! I still believe ED has developed a solution that is better than what’s out there today. The only question is, “how much better is it”? and “is it better enough to dictate a big price tag”? So having said that, let us investors “keep live”n the dream” until this thing plays out. At that time, you can call us foolish if ED’s technology is a bust. Nobody knows and probably won’t for a few months. ED is going to market and let the market be the final arbitor. Good luck all!!!!!
March 17th, 2006 at 8:24 am
Mark, that comment was not directed at you.
March 17th, 2006 at 8:32 am
Once again there was supposed to be a big press release earlier in the week and once again Nada.
March 17th, 2006 at 8:41 am
Nice to see you back on the new blog AZ, how is Sunny?
March 17th, 2006 at 11:02 am
Hey Mark, I am one of those people that corresponded with you prior to you shutting down your site. Because of work if I remember correctly. I just found this blog and hope it will stay up. Folks, Mark has consistantly expressed his EXTREME skepticism about ED from the first time I contacted him. I corresponded with him on HIS site simply asking his opinion. Here we are a year + later and NOTHING has changed. Its always just around the corner. Those that have said nothing was promised are wrong. Lots have been promised and I am still waiting. I HOPE I am wrong but this (investment) is starting to smell to high heaven. Time will tell. Mark, PLEASE stay on board as you are probably the ONLY expert in data compression on this board.
March 17th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
Mark and Sachin,
You guys are as close as we will ever get to Euclid’s experts, as far a knowledge and understanding of commpression technology.
Maybe you can answer some hypothetical questions for us based on your expertise.
-Have you guys ever heard of John Weiss, PhD or Michael Kirby, PhD at least in the compression arena?
-Is it theoretically possible to develop a totally new allorithmic math construct for compression as these guys claim?
-If in fact if they have devopled a compression technology that give orders of magnitude of 10x’s or greater than what is available does it have or will it have potential to be the groundbreaking commercial sucess they claim?
-Finally and much more difficult to answer (just your opinion) Can it be worth the billions they have estimated that it will be worth if in fact they have what they say?
I know these are difficult questions, but effectively ED has alluded to these claims.
Thank-you ever so much.
March 17th, 2006 at 3:01 pm
Was wondering if BOS, 1standgoal, or JimmyT have anything to add or if they have discovered this BLOG. I was really expecting to hear or see something in the past month. Georgia hope all is well in Greece, not missing much here. Nothing to report.
March 17th, 2006 at 6:12 pm
I’d just like to know what Mark’s credentials are and IF he is as knowledgeable as claims to be about video compression. All of the investors received a book written by Dr. Kirby — it was Greek to me (maybe that’s what inspired my trip) but certainly impressed the hell out of my son-in-law who is a computer engineer! He says Dr. Kirby is well-respected in his field. Tiny, wish you were a little more hopeful, but am so glad you’re on the blog and still hanging in there. Yes, I’d hope that some of the “regulars” on the other blog would put their two cents’ worth in here, but maybe they haven’t found it yet or maybe they’re just too busy. Whatever the reason, I’ll keep on hoping and hanging on. Can’t do much else.
March 17th, 2006 at 6:27 pm
Georgia, hang in there. Talked to R this evening, Big press release is coming at some point in the next couple of weeks. All good things come to those who wait. Eat more Baklava, drink more wine, be happy. Time will tell all.
March 18th, 2006 at 6:07 am
Georgia, do you remember how to get a hold of me. (You can figure it out) E-mail me I have some things to tell you.
March 18th, 2006 at 7:38 am
This “press release” has been coming out any day now……………………………….for months.
March 18th, 2006 at 8:00 am
When R tells me something it is usually very accurate. I feel pretty confident it will be out within 2 weeks. Guess we will see.
March 18th, 2006 at 8:20 am
I’ve been reading these blogs since October and have never seen such rumor and misinformation. The only comment I will make right now is that I stay pretty well informed of info obtained from sources close to R&B, who do not respond to these blog sites. In response to the validity of “40-50 million value” The company hired to value Euclid broke the company down into separate units. If all of the units were to bring top value, it would be around the 40 billion mark. However, in reality because of the diversity of the product the actual sales price was estimated at between 4.6-6.8 billion. These are fairly accurate numbers as I heard the information about 6 mos. ago. I have also been told that the earliest we might see a check is June and the latest would be August, for what that’s worth.
March 18th, 2006 at 9:23 am
>Have you guys ever heard of John Weiss, PhD or
>Michael Kirby, PhD at least in the compression arena?
I don’t know anything about these guys, and a quick search doesn’t seem to turn up much activity. Scholar.google.com does a good job of turning up academic papers, and you can search for yourself and see that these blokes are not active. Maybe it’s because they are hard at work at Euclid and don’t have time to publish. Or maybe it means they haven’t been able to cough up anything worth publishing. Who knows?
>-Is it theoretically possible to develop a totally new allorithmic >math construct for compression as these guys claim?
Of course it is. But it’s kind of confusing, they keep talking about it being compatible with MPEG-4. How can it be completely new?
And just because it’s completely new doesn’t mean it’s better. People are always cooking up new compression schemes that are only as good as the state of the art, or more likely, not as good. The only thing you should trust are benchmarks conducted by people who have the ability to do a proper job. (I would be happy to volunteer!) Note that investment firms do not really have the ability to do technical evaluations like this.
For a history lesson, see Fractal Compression. Totally new, totally different, theoretically a good technology, total worldwide revenues in 2005 probably very near 0.
>-If in fact if they have devopled a compression
> technology that give orders of magnitude of
>10x’s or greater than what is available does
>it have or will it have potential to be the
>groundbreaking commercial sucess they claim?
As long as it could be implemented using the same type of hardware as is currently needed for H.264 or the like. If it requires orders of magnitude more powerful hardware, it might be relegated to being nothing more than a curiousity.
>Finally and much more difficult to answer (just your
>opinion) Can it be worth the billions they have
>estimated that it will be worth if in fact they have
>what they say?
It’s certainly possible. The royalty stream on a universally adopted compression scheme like this could easily be billions per year.
March 18th, 2006 at 9:28 am
>I’d just like to know what Mark’s credentials are and
>IF he is as knowledgeable as claims to be
>about video compression.
You can see my credentials on my web page. Unlike Euclid, I’m pretty open about what I’ve done and what I’m up to.
I have no more knowledge about vide compressin than anyone else who is an educated user of the technology. I follow the compression filed fairly closely, but I am not in academia and can’t lay claim to the title “expert.”
But what does any of that matter? Every observation I’ve ever made about Euclid is about the behavior of the company. I don’t like they way they conduct business, and find it very suspicious. I feel that if they truly had what they have claimed all along, their external behavior would be much different.
March 18th, 2006 at 9:35 am
>In response to the validity of “40-50 million value”
?The company hired to value Euclid broke the company
>down into separate units. If all of the units were to bring
>top value, it would be around the 40 billion mark. However,
>in reality because of the diversity of the product the
>actual sales price was estimated at between 4.6-6.8
>billion. These are fairly accurate numbers as I heard
>the information about 6 mos. ago. I have also been told
>that the earliest we might see a check is June and the
>latest would be August, for what that’s worth.
If a company with no assets was running out of money and needed to scrape up some new investment capital, this is the kind of rumor they would float.
Guys, when, in the history of the world, have you heard of a single technology, unimplemented, being sold on the open market for $40 billion? Time for a reality check.
I also noticed that nobody was able to say that they have been seeing regular balance sheets from the company. As an investory, you should really know a few things about your company:
1) Cash on hand
2) Revenues
3) Run rate
It’s your money after all. It sounds like the only one you really know is 2, which we can infer is 0.
Of course, I have been told in this thread that I know nothing about investing. I guess it’s more likely that investors in a company expect to have this information withheld, it’s standard business practice.
March 18th, 2006 at 11:02 am
Mark, thank-you very much for your input and what appears to be an unbiased opinion, it is very helpful to all of us. I have been told since the very beginning that it is compatible with MPEG-4 and can be implemented using the same type of hardware as is currently needed for H.264 or the like. It also does not require orders of magnitude more powerful hardware, it is supposed to run on the exact same platform. The way it has been described to me is that it is highly evolutionary over what is avaiable now. Something radically evolved ahead of everythng else eventually becomes revolutionary. I guess we will see shortly. I appreciate your input and the time you spend on this blog trying to answer our questions.
March 18th, 2006 at 11:20 am
hey let me make a couple of points.
1) I can’t edit my previous comments for some reason, so i fyou see those misspellings and think I’m a uneducated twit, you are only partly right. I would LIKE to correct them and then look like an educated twit, but I can’t.
2) This comment thread has really turned into a forum, which isn’t exactly what it was meant for.
Which leads me to a proposal. Would you Euclideans like to have a private discussion board or blog? It can be arranged. As far as privacy goes, I don’t think there’s any way we can enforce that it is limited to investors and those with a real interest in Euclid, but we could try.
It might be best for one of you in the angel community to set up a Yahoo! group, and then you could invite outsiders (like me) in. But we could set up a discussion list on one of my web sites if that’s easier.
March 18th, 2006 at 12:08 pm
Mark, it seems to me that you have the same opinion of Euclid as do my broker, CPA, and banker. They all have had the same similar comments over the past few years. I think your skepticism is based on the reality of the way ED has been operating. I appreciate what seems to be a non-biased candor and can only hope like all other investors that this is a revoloutionary “product” that simply is going through the growing pains of trying to re-write history with this type of leap in technology.
March 18th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
Tiny, I know you posted an e-mail address on the other blog, but since it’s shut down I can’t get to the archives to retrieve your address. Was is a Yahoo one? If so, I think I can find you!
March 18th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
My 2 cents:
I have not been directly involved in video compression but have been following a lot of related research and these names (John Weiss/Michael Kirby) havent crossed my eyes earlier.
It is theoretically possible to develop a new better algorithm for compression as these guys claim, but not something ‘totally’ new as they have to stay compatible with MPEG4 standard. You mentioned 10x’s better, I dont think that much gain will be easy to achieve.
As for the potential to be the groundbreaking commercial success they claim, I think Mark has already put it right. If it doesnt comes too heavy on the processor, it does. Even if it needs significantly better hardware, that wouldn’t mean its worthless. Just that magnitude of its success will 10x’s smaller.
But ofcourse all this doesn’t matters if they don’t have what they say. We all know that research is uncertain and it takes unpredictable time. But even if they havent been able to reach the 10x’s better compression yet, after so much time they probably should be able to show atleast ’something’. Maybe a 2x or 5x better algorithm, or sample software demonstrating the steps of the new algorithm which have been implemented.
If they are able to ’show’ progress to you (and not just ‘claim’ it) it should be fine (as long as you investors don’t loose patience). [I mean showing working code, not speculations in powerpoint/pdf]
Moreover, it may look big now, but if it takes another 5 years to hit the market, it wont create that much buzz. (and based on what Mark mentioned about Euclid’s history, thatz when they might decide to drop this and start working on another technology with a fresh round of investments)
March 19th, 2006 at 7:03 am
Mark, I would really appreciate it if you could set up a discussion list on one of your websites. Then you could leave explicit directions for anyone coming to this site on how to get to your discussion site. I am afraid this site will get shut down like the last one. By the way your skepticism is warranted and your input is appreciated!!!! Euclid could and should have set up something similar put my GUESS is that the last thing they want is investors to be comparing notes with each other. You know…..divide and conquer. Also, let EVERYONE IN. It will be to cumbersome trying to do otherwise and personally I want other opionions. Then we can ALL try to contact others so that FINALLY there is a place for ANYONE associated with Euclid (investor or skeptic) to compare notes. Most people I know that have invested in this thing get ZERO information. Thanks for the offer Mark. I for one hope you will set it up. We need it!
March 19th, 2006 at 7:25 am
One other point Mark, I would hope that if the new discussion board attracts people that ONLY are coming there to insult or get things stirred up I would ask that you would permanently zap their ip address. I know that is done on sports mb’s all the time. We need discussion not insults.
March 19th, 2006 at 8:13 am
Who’s going to be the arbitrator of who insults and who stirs things up? The last time I dared to criticize a member of ED, I had half the bloggers wanting to lynch me. It’s either free speech or it is not. Good offer Mark, I hope you can do that for us.
March 19th, 2006 at 8:42 am
permanent euclid blog ??? is there a way to keep up?
March 19th, 2006 at 8:48 am
I was told april pay out then june , anything else on this subject? i HOPE IT’S NOT JUST A BIG PILE OF POOP!!! R&B NEEDS TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS!!!! They need We need to start a forum on Euclid. Good luck all and God Bless!!
March 19th, 2006 at 11:08 am
I disagree Tiny. If its on Mark’s discussion board HE should be the one to decide who gets banned. I’m not talking about disagreements I’m talking about someone that comes on and acts like a 16 yr old obnoxious punk. JUST coming on the board to insult, be vulgar and get everyone fighting. ED needs some kind of forum to inform and discuss. Mark volunteered to help us and he doesnt have a dog in the fight so he’s the perfect person to decide if someone is coming on the board JUST to be an a$$. If you read many business mb’s as I do ….you would understand.
March 19th, 2006 at 11:41 am
I have no problem with that.
March 19th, 2006 at 11:46 am
I like the idea of a dedicated forum, there are enough people with enough interest.
The forums tend to get ‘noisy’ with insults and off-topic posts. And very often they don’t show up easily in google/yahoo search results. So every once in a while, one of you can probably submit a summary of developments as a post here on c10n.
And just to clear the doubt, rest assured that c10n isn’t going away soon :-)
March 19th, 2006 at 1:45 pm
Thinking more on this, who knows how many more investors want to discuss their investments in other similar companies. There are doubtful cases like this and there have been sure-hoaxes like Zeosync.
The investors want to discuss their investments with other investors and they want ‘outside’ compression experts to comment on whatever information they can share.
How about a slightly broader forum which covers all data compression related investments/investors? As (positive?) side-effects, such a place can be used by researchers to pitch their work to angels, or by the angels to find new perspective investment avenues etc… etc…
For whatever topic draws too much attention (like ED right now), it can have dedicated zones/sub-forums.
March 19th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
http://dogma.net/euclid
a phpBB discussion board that is locked down - you need administrator permission to get in, read, etc. when you apply for an account i will be sending you an email asking you why you care before approving you.
March 19th, 2006 at 10:13 pm
People are registering but no one is posting??
March 19th, 2006 at 10:23 pm
It may take a day or so before you become activated so that if you dont get on after Mark’s email you simply havent been activated. In the mean time…….spread the word that Euclid finally has a “HOME”.
March 21st, 2006 at 5:46 am
Its up and working but takes some time to get activated. Very nice home for all of the ED’s.
March 21st, 2006 at 9:31 pm
Mark I cannot for the life of me find my password to check my e-mails on this bluestates account. Could you please write me an e-mail has to how I can get to you in a less public manner so I can change my registration to a different E-mail so I can access the Euclid forum with out changing my screen name. You can send me an e-mail at eucliddis@aol.com. It is just a name I used earlier so people could get a hold of me, and it is in no way affiliated with Euclid Discoveries. Thanks. Tiny Angel. PS I am registered as tiny angel, but I believe you must have sent me a password for that account but I cannot access the E-mail account of blue states to get the password you assigned. Real bright Eh?
March 22nd, 2006 at 7:58 am
Tiny, His email address is markn (at) ieee (dot) org got it from the bullitin board he set up.
July 5th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
They removed most of details from their website as well as demo….:) And this would mean????? Something went wrong???