Thank you!

Crowdsourcing works, but you need to ask the right questions.

Yes, a lot of investors were friends and family members. I fall into the former category, as do most of the founding technical staff. We’d all known MJ for a long time, and believed he was the right guy to be at the helm of something like CH. Time may prove us wrong, but none of us were “tricked” into believing in him.

Originally we were all contractors. It made sense as a startup, and nobody balked. Regarding the mandatory investment comment, I know of nobody who worked there that was required to invest. I do know former employees that have no stock at all.

CH was never secretive about the goings-on there… Hell, we had live webcams in the office 24/7, and open chats during Demo Day. I believe the vids are still available online for anyone who cares to view them.

I’m personally feeling better about the money I’ve invested than I did a year ago. A year ago (when I left CH as an employee), I was not not convinced about the company’s direction. Seeing where they’re going now is heartening to me. It’s more aligned with what I wanted to see when I invested and when I worked there.

To MJ’s credit, he’s always said the company will change direction if the market dictates.

therefore the b-model must be to keep selling the chaordix platform and have each buyer of the software build a new and unique crowd around its vertical.

some issues with this strategy… CH now is going to develop its Charodix platform without its own community. If it has a contract to maintain and upgrade Vencorps Charodix platform who owns the IP? CH is now a software licensing and contract labour company?

MJ is busy in the valley? MJ says he is moving there deto the lack of startup culture in Calgary. Does this means CH the Software development company is moving to the valley too? or is MJ now out of the picture?

CH would need more cash in order to keep running and to continue to build its software. How many licenses need to be sold to recover the 7.7M already spent. Sounds like a wind up of the company.

Prediction –

MJ announces his resignation as CEO and leaves Calgary – some token role as an advisor/director possibly…UNTIL

CH announces it has sold its assets and is ceasing as a business due to an inability to raise new funds.

Selloff of assets will take the form spinning of assets into new corps and the new financing needed to take them to their next step diluting out existing CH shareholders to a minority position.

fianlly –

Too many people picking on MJ – yes he was the CEO, but the Board is ultimately responsible to shareholders. He’s an easy target because he’s such a flamboyant personality, but the truth is that Brian Craig and the rest of the CH board allowed them to spend 6 million over budget in the first 18 months without oversight, without controls. Its very obvious that the board is letting MJ take the heat when they were obviously negligent.

The vencorps sale is not “positive” thing that CH is trying to sell it as – it is a route for a few insiders to salvage some value and for CH management to roll up and dump what’s left of the company in the trash.

So erick was right the first time – CH welcome to the deadpool – its a fitting reunion as they will be joining the ethics of the CH management team.

I am just trying to sort this all out. On the CH website it has both press releases:

http://www.camb...ouse.com/media/

Link to press release issued by Spencer Trask, discussing asset and membership transfer:

http://www.eart...on,402194.shtml

Corresponding link to press release issued by Cambrian:

http://www.cnw....8/20/c2348.html

It is very odd that the two companies didn’t just issue a joint release, which is more the standard practice with announcements like this. And if for some reason they do agree to send out their own releases, there should be consistent information between them. These two releases just don’t agree with each other.

And now I’m nitpicking but the heading in the Cambrian release doesn’t make sense or is just badly worded and not even relevant to the actual content of the release. Shoddy.

“A press release issued by Trask today confirms that Cambrian ’sold certain assets’ to them, including a wholesale transfer of the Cambrian member community. But the corresponding Cambrian press release today AND video still dodges this fact, with the video specifically referring to the transaction as a licensing deal.”

I have seen the CH press release I have not seen the Trask press release and would really appropriate seeing it. As I have based a post on the CH Forums on that statment http://www.camb...iscussion/2793/

http://driveit....1004010/1000522

The fact that CH sold the platform and the community to Spencer Trask and Vencorps and that Sean Wise (also a CH board member) is now the CEO of Vencorps makes me question the sales price for the platform and community – hard to say since no one is saying how much the charged.

One thing is for sure – as an investor, this is a group of people I wouldn’t trust ever again. They remind me of the Nixon administration. Elitism and paranoia sitting atop incompetance.

A press release issued by Trask today confirms that Cambrian ’sold certain assets’ to them, including a wholesale transfer of the Cambrian member community. But the corresponding Cambrian press release today AND video still dodges this fact, with the video specifically referring to the transaction as a licensing deal.

Either way, it is worth asking: what valuable core assets remain for Cambrian then? An unproven technology platform with one customer and no community to call your own?

Sikorsky talks in the video about the press backlash and that they were over due for some bad press since they have been media darlings for the past couple of years. But $7.7 million spent, way off the mark of forcasted revenues, no commercialized projects, etc.? Sorry fella but THAT is what creates bad press.

Also them explaining that ‘people’ are a huge cost in a software company should not shock anyone. But that is precisely why successful startup companies recognize that it is so important to make sure resources are focused on creating revenue-generating products vs. vanity projects and vaporware PR stunts, especially when you are accountable for that much of investors’ money.

Did I also properly hear them confirm in the video that they have been directing attention and support for Mob4Hire? Even though there was no expected benefit to the company/shareholders?

Sikorsky looks uncomfortable, and I guess I can’t blame him. Worse, the whole video just came across to me as an insincere attempt to be transparant about the situation the company is in right now (or at worst, a plea for sympathy). And now what has been created unfortunately is more fodder for the naysayers who have been crying about questionable directing of company spending/resources, seeing them put that effort into such a shoddy PR video whose message is an unconvincing, ‘No seriously, everything is fine over here’.

But for that matter the email sent out by the Cambrian president last week responding to Erick’s article was just as equally confusing/contradictory.

Now I’ll return to reserving my worthless opinion……

http://www.yout...h?v=QYyXX3jVwwI