Job Losses at Euclid Discoveries?
Posted by Mark Nelson on 7th December 2009 | Permanent Link
We know that the great recession of 2009 has caused slashes in staffing at companies large and small, and it appears that Euclid Discoveries (discussed in great detail here) has had to cut back as well.
Euclid has a list of key bios on their web site, and as of today, December 7, 2009, that includes just three people:
- Richard Y. Wingard, Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer
- J. Robert Werner, Co-Founder & President
- Charles P. Pace, Chief Technologist
What’s strange is that this list of key bios used to be a lot longer. Using the beloved Internet Archive, we can take a look at the same list from just two years earlier, and wonder what happened to:
- Steve N. Hutchinson, Executive Strategist
- Anne Marsden, Chief Marketing Officer
- John Weiss, PhD, Chief Algorithmic Mathematician
- Igor Najfeld, PhD, Algorithmic Mathematician
- Amit K. Roy-Chowdhury, PhD, Chief Consulting Scientist
- Jeffrey V. Roberts, Director of Engineering
- Anne Watelet, Technical Process Manager
- Renato Pizzorni, Lead Software Engineer
- Darin DeForest, PhD (ABD), Lead Algorithmic Engineer
- Richard Gyger, Technical Lead
- Elizabeth Marmion, Director of Operations
- Bentley Pace, Knowledge Manager
I don’t know whether any of these people were cut loose, or whether ED just decided to clean up a rather long web page. And a check of LinkedIn shows that there are at least a few people who still list themselves as employed at ED:
- Bill Wilmoth, Information Technology Analyst
- Nigel Lee, Chief Algorithmic Engineer
- Anne Watelet, Technical Process Manager
- Jeffrey Roberts, Director of Engineering
- Bentley Pace, Knowledge Manager
I would be very surprised if all twelve of these people were full time employees at Euclid. Carrying that many big salaries would have created a pretty rapid burn rate, and I don’t think the company could have sustained it for this long.
The big question is whether what we are seeing now is the death rattle of a company cutting expenses to the bone, or whether there is just a lot of smoke and no real fire. Whichever it is, Euclid Discoveries is, as always, not saying.
December 7th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Gotta ask you Mark, what is your goal here? From what I understand, some of those people are still there and others, were only ever and still are, in a consultative role.
As I’ve said before, their doors are still open, nobody has lost money (yet?), and probably the most important, nobody has proof that there’s a scam here, just conjecture and emotions. Has it taken longer, (MUCH LONGER!) than investors wanted it to? Yes! It’s obvious here that they have some unsavvy investors who probably shouldn’t be there who have let their emotions and “dreams” of riches get the best of them.
This isn’t Microsoft here doing the developing. It’s a couple of guys trying to “change the world” with roadblocks and setbacks along the way. (That’s actually is a good point to consider. What if it were MS doing this and had all these delays and stuff? How would the investors react?) Again, my gut tells me that these types of delays, deadlines not being made, and changing course relative to discovering new methods, are inherent and typical to new technology development? Not sure?
I know I sound like an ED cheerleader, but I’m not. I’ve been watching this for a few years and am anxiously waiting to see the conclusion, which I see coming very soon, one way or another. They’re boxed in and there’s no place to go. So either it’s going to be the best thing since sliced bread and there’s a big payday, ED gets sold for a fraction of what they “think” it’s worth, or it’s a scam and no product exists. I think it weeks, not months before we know!
Stay tuned!
December 7th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
And ‘Looking In’ I have to ask what is your goal here too?
This is one of my computer hobbies, and Euclid has been dragging it thru the mud.
They has taken people’s money and are STILL ACTIVELY trying to get more people to invest into this scam.
It does not take years to develop a working proto-type of a compression program. No other ***WORKING*** compression program has taken even a year to get a base demo working. NONE!!!
Plus the handly use of non-stock/shares investment that enables them to avoid reporting to the SEC should make it clear that this is a scam.
And yes, I have written working compression programs myself so I know how hard it is to do. But it is not so hard that proof-of-ideas takes this long.
December 7th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Just waiting to see who is right! I understood this to be new compression tech and not just an improvement of the same old compression model? Personally, I don’t know a lot about compression?
Come on people, angel investing IS RISKY! The majority of qualified investors throw their money in, go on with their lives, and HOPE the company and themselves hit it big, knowing that 95% of these start ups FAIL.
Additionally Earl, you and many others keep using the term scam. How do you substantiate that position? Does continually raising money make it a scam? Does missing deadlines make it a scam? Does lack of the principle’s ability to effectively communicate to the investor community make it a scam? Sounds to me like the emotional roller coaster ride you’ve been on makes it a scam?
December 7th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
But remember folks, HE wants to go ahead and sell this thing so he can pay for that big jet airplane.
How many of you had heard that line before?
& what about this Nancy Perez?
anybody ever hear her name tossed around…as a BIG investor, waiting for the payoff as well?
December 8th, 2009 at 5:49 am
@Jacksonville:
Who is HE, and who is Nancy Perez? I don’t know what you are talking about.
@Looking In:
>what is your goal here?
To shed light. I would like to prevent unqualified investors from continuing to put money into Euclid Discoveries. My email conversations with unhappy investors have overwhelmingly been with people who should not have invested in this company. They were not truly aware of the risks, and they could not afford the losses.
Anything wrong with that?
>I’ve been watching this for a few years and
>am anxiously waiting to see the conclusion,
>which I see coming very soon, one way or
>another.
Let’s just say for the sake of argument that the top executives of a hypothetical company are drawing nice big salaries and not doing a whole lot of work. This would be a pretty sweet deal. If they cut the salary rate for everyone else down to a minimum, they could continue drawing these salaries for years, even decades, as long as they could keep their investors strung along on false hope.
I’m not saying this is what is happening at ED, but if the average stockholder suspected it was, there is nothing they can do. They don’t hold stock in ED, only in some LLC. They have nobody to complain to. They can’t go to the annual meeting, and they can’t even demand an audited financial statement.
If that were happening in a company I had money in, I would understand that it would be very hard to prove anything illegal was going on. To show actual fraud you’d have to catch these guys actually discussing this strategy in a room and have records. Not going to happen. But I would sure feel like I was the victim of a scam.
- Mark
December 8th, 2009 at 7:14 am
To the people who have been in this for 2 or 3 years, delays and missed dealines etc. are easy to justify. After you have heard the same story for almost 10 years it is not so easy. Greed is a very powerful emotion.
December 10th, 2009 at 8:06 am
Earl Colby Pottinger’s response #2 is spot-on! Why should it take so long?
When IBM’s Conor O’Mahony began quoting DB2’s compression ratios on his blog August 11, I began writing my own TPC-H compressor. It took me only 14 days to beat his figures 3-to-1, and beat Oracle’s ‘Advanced Compression’ 5-to-1. Fourteen days!
OK, and 14 nights, too!
December 10th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
A little bit of interesting data found here, where ED says they have a total of 4 employees. If we count the 3 employees listed in the Key Bios page along the listed contact, Patsy Dahlinghaus, that makes a total of four.
Also good to see that ED has an A+ rating with the BBB. Only weakness being that the BBB is willing to cough up that rating with 0 data points.
- Mark
December 11th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Well, has anyone heard next completion date for the project?
When is it going to sell?
Who are the interested buyers now? Google, Microsoft, a company outta China?
Maybe “W” can pay for his jet now.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:36 am
Alan I think your offer is like your sanity - not going to last indefinetly!!!
December 12th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
On a similar subject….about Euclid Discoveries, anyway….did anyone see this story?
http://www.levp.com/news/documents/StrikingABalance.pdf
What a crock. The investors I know haven’t heard hardly a peep (I’m not one personally invested). The story makes it sound like these guys are more transparent than glass, talking up a storm about their company.
December 18th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
I’ve been invested in Euclid for over 5 years now, and I haven’t heard anything in the last six months. By nothing I mean absolutely nothing. If there’s an Angel out there that would like to email me, and give an update I sure would appreciate it. I don’t mean to sound negative, but from what I’ve heard it’s not good news.
December 19th, 2009 at 6:04 am
Six months?????? Based on your post, you’ve got to be a part of an LLC. Monthly newsletters have been sent to registered investors since August. I’d call your LLC head!
December 19th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
what exactly is an “LLC” please ??
December 19th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
@CURIOUS:
An LLC is a limited liability company. What is of interest in this thread is that some of the investors in Euclid Discoveries appear to be LLCs. The LLCs gathered money from small investors, pooled their funds, then invested in various rounds of funding for ED. Sadly, the people who put money into an LLC don’t actually have any rights or protection for their investment in ED - all those rights are vested in the LLC, which is the actual stakeholder.
Creating an LLC has the primary effect of protecting owners or officers of the company from lawsuits. If you have a beef with an LLC, you have to sue the company itself, not the owners. This protection is not absolute, of course, there are always cases in which owners may be found liable for misconduct.
I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.
- Mark
December 21st, 2009 at 7:23 am
LLC actually combines aspects of partnerships and corporations, so an LLC is less formal and more flexible than a typical corporation, yet offers protection as well as certain advantages that are much the same. For example, members cannot be found personally liable for company debts. Their assets are separate from the assets of the LLC so they cannot be seized. One of the advantages of an LLC is that taxation is based on the partnership model. Flow-through taxation is advantageous since members are only required to pay taxes on their earnings once instead of paying both corporate and individual taxes.
A Limited Liability Company, unlike a corporation, can be made up of as many members as the company wishes to have and it does not require bylaws, meetings, or the recording of minutes. While many states do not demand an operating agreement, it is a good idea to have one in place of the usual bylaws or contracts.
In corporations, shareholders may transfer stock or their interest in ownership, while members of an LLC cannot. Transferring one’s interest in the company may be dependent on the approval of other members. In addition, if a member of an LLC passes away, decides to leave, or goes bankrupt, the LLC is usually dissolved, while corporations are not limited by such restrictions.
January 15th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Since I was one of the names on the list, I can say that they had no layoffs. I just left for a different opportunity. As far as I know, there are more than the 3 folks still there. I’m pretty sure there are at least 2 programmers still there.
January 15th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
So Richard, what is your opinion? Does ED have what they say they have and have been promising for over 10 years? You are the first person that I have run across that used to work there and no longer does. I don’t think any of us are asking for technical detail just some sort of affirmation that we have not been taken advantage of.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:13 pm
I left over 2 years ago so I can’t say what they have now. Euclid’s approach to compression is innovative tho I’m not sure it’s achievable. The “object recognition” portion, if they have it all working would definitely give substantial compression improvements over straight mpeg-4. I’ve read in this and other threads about it not taking 10 years for compression method X. This effort was heavy into research. It definitely isn’t an incremental improvement over anything else out there.
I’m with some of the other folks, why haven’t you guys contacted Euclid and asked to see what they have? I had no direct contact with any investors, but they do have a physical office that I’m sure you could visit.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:17 pm
I need to rephrase one of the statements.
It definitely isn’t just an incremental improvement over anything else out there. It would be a massive leap over what’s out there.
January 16th, 2010 at 9:53 pm
Hey Richard, probably will get censored for saying this- but
why not use your skills on what I have discovered? And help build the earthquake-forecasting related discovery-technology? Is it forbidden to seek cooperation here? What about Haiti? Doesn’t anyone care about forecasting this sort of thing? Hello people
January 18th, 2010 at 9:14 am
Hey Alan, does your technology enable teleportation like star trek. Transporters convert a person or object into an energy pattern (a process called dematerialization), then “beam” it to a target, where it is reconverted into matter (rematerialization).
January 18th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
There is a link between a theory I have re; teleportation, and the data storage technology: e.g. both involve “space computing”- determining where the space(s) is(are) (you cannot “teleport” (which is related to “gliding” (”whole body transfer”)(probably called “4-momentum” by physics- more on this I could say, just so valuable) unless you have somewhere suitable to go, I guess.
Earthquakes: whole body transfer (of earth) is required for these.
A “weighted” bowl in bowls is different from a non-weighted bowl. A weighted bowl will cause a ball that it collides with to suddenly take off; a non-weighted bowl will tend to imaprt less momentum in a collision.
Its realy hard for me to discuss this as I keep getting into Non Disclosure Agreement situations.
Your comment is perceptive re: teleportation, and a useful insight.
June 22nd, 2010 at 8:36 am
And, of course, Euclid investors will get NOTHING from the sale of Corista even though it is all based on technology developed by Euclid — talk about a conflict of interest! I can’t believe Richard and his wife are able to get away with this — but then Euclid has gotten away with taking people’s money for no return for over 10 years so why should anybody be surprised.