117 of My Favorite Albums Growing Up(In no particular order) - Click to Enlarge.
How many of these do you know? Did any have an impact on you? What great albums did I miss? What were some of your most influential records growing up?
Kevin
Saturday, November 21, 2009
117 of My Favorite Albums Growing Up
I just got back from seeing the movie Pirate Radio. I really liked it (8 out of 10 stars for me), particularly the music. It was great listening to all that music I grew up to, and the movie reminded me just how much I miss "albums," something we seemed to have lost with the digital music revolution. Watching this movie inspired me to put the below collage together of 117 albums that most influenced me growing up. I'm sure I missed some, but this gives you an idea of what shaped my musical tastes. Other than grouping the same band/artist together, these are in no particular order. (Click to enlarge.)
117 of My Favorite Albums Growing Up
(In no particular order) - Click to Enlarge.
How many of these do you know? Did any have an impact on you? What great albums did I miss? What were some of your most influential records growing up?
Kevin
117 of My Favorite Albums Growing Up(In no particular order) - Click to Enlarge.
How many of these do you know? Did any have an impact on you? What great albums did I miss? What were some of your most influential records growing up?
Kevin
Monday, November 9, 2009
Gizmo5 / SIPphone Shareholders--Beware of Michael Robertson's History
.
There have been rumors reported in the press that Gizmo5 (SIPphone) could be sold soon (now confirmed here). In a previous blog, I cautioned any prospective buyers to be sure and do full due diligence. I encouraged them to not just take Robertson at his word (something no one should ever do with someone like Michael Robertson), but be sure and take a full accounting of any code, data centers, and speak personally with each and every employee.
Today, I want to caution any Gizmo5/SIPphone shareholders. They should look at how Michael Robertson dealt with the 100-some-odd Shareholders at Linspire when he sold that company's assets.
Here is what happened at Linspire:
1. Robertson sold Linspire without any input or notice from the majority of individual Shareholders. Even large shareholders, such as myself, were kept completely in the dark.
2. Millions in cash is still missing and unaccounted for to Linspire shareholders.
3. Robertson sold all the Linspire assets in a secret, backroom deal that to this day the terms of which have never been disclosed to the Linspire shareholders. Linspire's assets were sold well over a year ago and Robertson hasn't given ANY report or accounting to the Linspire shareholders. As I predicted, it would require a lawsuit to get Robertson to tell shareholders what happened, and even after that, we still have no answers.
4. The only accounting that was made, was Robertson talking to the press, where he basically said he and his father-in-law, as preferred shareholders, would be the only ones to see anything from the sale.
5. To date, every Linspire common shareholder has lost 100% of their investment, without any notice from Robertson, who remains in hiding from Linspire shareholders. (Actually, ONE common shareholder, Tina Stahlke-Donaldson, was able to sell some of her shares back to the company at a nice profit, after Robertson forced the CFO to accommodate that transaction. Why the special treatment for this one female employee? More on that in a future blog.)
Because VC's are involved at Gizmo5/SIPphone, they may force Robertson to behave more ethically there than he did at Linspire. However, my advice to any Gizmo5 shareholder would be to not sign anything without a full accounting BEFOREHAND. My instincts tell me that you, just like the Linspire common shareholders, could also walk away with nothing, even if Robertson does. Michael will want big numbers to be splashed around in the press so he can pretend to have had a success, but in the end, how much did individual shareholders make? (Thousands of shareholders lost millions at MP3.com, and Linspire shareholders lost all their investment and STILL don't even know what Linspire sold for.) If you are in fact going to get the shaft, you better have Michael explain himself BEFORE the deal is done. If Gizmo5 sells to a big company, that company may never disclose the actual purchase price, and if Robertson treats you the way he did Linspire shareholders, HE will never tell you either.
I'm not sure why anyone would pay more than a few million for Gizmo5, but even if Robertson were to sell it for a big number, I predict the common shareholders still see little to nothing. The VCs will likely have 3x or more liquidation preferences, and knowing Robertson as I do, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he will somehow get the same treatment with his shares. Even if someone was crazy enough to value Gizmo5 for tens of millions, watch how quickly Robertson can "creatively" make sure that as much as possible drops to his pockets, not the common shareholder's.
Why would Robertson suddenly get generous with employees and common shareholders? He is the greediest person I know. Remember, this is the same person who tried to have several former employees arrested for "embezzlement" in a failed attempt to try and take back their severance payments. When those attempts were flatly rejected by the San Diego police department, he then sued these employees to get his greedy little hands on THEIR severance. All that failed energy, work, and harassment over a couple hundred thousand dollars?!? Why would any expect Robertson to suddenly grow a conscience?
Ask questions BEFORE any deal is done, otherwise, you could end up just like the Linspire shareholders, with shares of stock worth less than toilet paper and no answers.
I hope I'm wrong, and the Gizmo5/SIPphone shareholders actually see a return on their investment. I'll be sure and report if they do. At the end of the day, Robertson's real worth will not be determined by how much money he lines his own pockets with (like he did at MP3.com), but how much do ALL the investors make? THAT is the number that REALLY matters.
Kevin
Michael Robertson, the greediest man I know.
There have been rumors reported in the press that Gizmo5 (SIPphone) could be sold soon (now confirmed here). In a previous blog, I cautioned any prospective buyers to be sure and do full due diligence. I encouraged them to not just take Robertson at his word (something no one should ever do with someone like Michael Robertson), but be sure and take a full accounting of any code, data centers, and speak personally with each and every employee.
Today, I want to caution any Gizmo5/SIPphone shareholders. They should look at how Michael Robertson dealt with the 100-some-odd Shareholders at Linspire when he sold that company's assets.
Here is what happened at Linspire:
1. Robertson sold Linspire without any input or notice from the majority of individual Shareholders. Even large shareholders, such as myself, were kept completely in the dark.
2. Millions in cash is still missing and unaccounted for to Linspire shareholders.
3. Robertson sold all the Linspire assets in a secret, backroom deal that to this day the terms of which have never been disclosed to the Linspire shareholders. Linspire's assets were sold well over a year ago and Robertson hasn't given ANY report or accounting to the Linspire shareholders. As I predicted, it would require a lawsuit to get Robertson to tell shareholders what happened, and even after that, we still have no answers.
4. The only accounting that was made, was Robertson talking to the press, where he basically said he and his father-in-law, as preferred shareholders, would be the only ones to see anything from the sale.
5. To date, every Linspire common shareholder has lost 100% of their investment, without any notice from Robertson, who remains in hiding from Linspire shareholders. (Actually, ONE common shareholder, Tina Stahlke-Donaldson, was able to sell some of her shares back to the company at a nice profit, after Robertson forced the CFO to accommodate that transaction. Why the special treatment for this one female employee? More on that in a future blog.)
Because VC's are involved at Gizmo5/SIPphone, they may force Robertson to behave more ethically there than he did at Linspire. However, my advice to any Gizmo5 shareholder would be to not sign anything without a full accounting BEFOREHAND. My instincts tell me that you, just like the Linspire common shareholders, could also walk away with nothing, even if Robertson does. Michael will want big numbers to be splashed around in the press so he can pretend to have had a success, but in the end, how much did individual shareholders make? (Thousands of shareholders lost millions at MP3.com, and Linspire shareholders lost all their investment and STILL don't even know what Linspire sold for.) If you are in fact going to get the shaft, you better have Michael explain himself BEFORE the deal is done. If Gizmo5 sells to a big company, that company may never disclose the actual purchase price, and if Robertson treats you the way he did Linspire shareholders, HE will never tell you either.
I'm not sure why anyone would pay more than a few million for Gizmo5, but even if Robertson were to sell it for a big number, I predict the common shareholders still see little to nothing. The VCs will likely have 3x or more liquidation preferences, and knowing Robertson as I do, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he will somehow get the same treatment with his shares. Even if someone was crazy enough to value Gizmo5 for tens of millions, watch how quickly Robertson can "creatively" make sure that as much as possible drops to his pockets, not the common shareholder's.
Why would Robertson suddenly get generous with employees and common shareholders? He is the greediest person I know. Remember, this is the same person who tried to have several former employees arrested for "embezzlement" in a failed attempt to try and take back their severance payments. When those attempts were flatly rejected by the San Diego police department, he then sued these employees to get his greedy little hands on THEIR severance. All that failed energy, work, and harassment over a couple hundred thousand dollars?!? Why would any expect Robertson to suddenly grow a conscience?
Ask questions BEFORE any deal is done, otherwise, you could end up just like the Linspire shareholders, with shares of stock worth less than toilet paper and no answers.
I hope I'm wrong, and the Gizmo5/SIPphone shareholders actually see a return on their investment. I'll be sure and report if they do. At the end of the day, Robertson's real worth will not be determined by how much money he lines his own pockets with (like he did at MP3.com), but how much do ALL the investors make? THAT is the number that REALLY matters.
Kevin
Michael Robertson, the greediest man I know.Monday, October 19, 2009
Michael Robertson Throws MP3tunes Customers Under The Bus As He Loses His SECOND Court Case This Week
.
Michael Robertson isn't having a very good week.
After losing a motion for Summary Judgment earlier this week to try and see the Freespire.com website taken down, today Robertson was dealt a crushing blow. Judge William Pauley ruled that Michael Robertson can be rejoined as a defendant in the copyright infringement case against Robertson and his company MP3tunes. This means if the dozen plus record companies and publishing concerns who are suing Robertson for copyright infringement win, Robertson could be found personally liable. (Read here how Robertson prematurely claimed victory in this matter, only to have that earlier ruling reversed today.) Given the statutory damages in copyright infringement cases, this could be in the billions of dollars (as Robertson should know all too well, given his historical loss at MP3.com for copyright infringement). You can read the full ruling here.
But don't worry, Robertson has a defense. He's blaming the MP3tunes customers. THEY are the REAL copyright infringers, not him.
Michael Robertson throws MP3tunes customers under
the bus to defend himself against copyright infringement.
I have watched Robertson try to blame his employees for any copyright misdeeds at MP3tunes. Apparently he now has a new strategy, and Michael Robertson who likes to pretend to be the champion of consumer rights, is throwing MP3tunes customers under the bus as a way to defend himself from the alleged copyright infringement. From the ruling:
"MP3tunes argues that the Amended Complaint fails to allege any direct infringement by MP3tunes--that is, any volitional conduct by MP3tunes. Rather, the Amended Complaint establishes that MP3tunes' customers are the ones engaged in volitional acts of infringement."
In other words, "Hey, I didn't violate any copyright laws, MY CUSTOMERS DID!" Yikes!
Why would anyone want to be a customer of MP3tunes, given Robertson's position in this case? Do you really want to join a website, and if that site is sued for copyright violations, they then BLAME YOU for the infringement? The complaint goes on to say, "The person who actually presses the button to make the recoding supplies the necessary element of volition, not the person who manufactures, maintains, or, if distinct from the operator, owns the machine."
So Robertson creates a website, and because of how the site copies and stores files, YOU, an innocent, unsuspecting MP3tunes customer, could be blamed for any copyright infringement, simply for having used that site, because YOU "pushed the button." So much for Robertson defending his customers. I watched Robertson toss minority shareholders out of the way as he scrambled for a life raft as he sank Linspire. Now, he's tossing MP3tunes customers under the bus to defend his personal net worth. Not cool, but classic Robertson.
I would recommend to all my friends, family and associates to not be "pushing any buttons" at MP3tunes. If you do, Robertson will point the finger at you.
Kevin
Michael Robertson isn't having a very good week.
After losing a motion for Summary Judgment earlier this week to try and see the Freespire.com website taken down, today Robertson was dealt a crushing blow. Judge William Pauley ruled that Michael Robertson can be rejoined as a defendant in the copyright infringement case against Robertson and his company MP3tunes. This means if the dozen plus record companies and publishing concerns who are suing Robertson for copyright infringement win, Robertson could be found personally liable. (Read here how Robertson prematurely claimed victory in this matter, only to have that earlier ruling reversed today.) Given the statutory damages in copyright infringement cases, this could be in the billions of dollars (as Robertson should know all too well, given his historical loss at MP3.com for copyright infringement). You can read the full ruling here.
But don't worry, Robertson has a defense. He's blaming the MP3tunes customers. THEY are the REAL copyright infringers, not him.
Michael Robertson throws MP3tunes customers underthe bus to defend himself against copyright infringement.
"MP3tunes argues that the Amended Complaint fails to allege any direct infringement by MP3tunes--that is, any volitional conduct by MP3tunes. Rather, the Amended Complaint establishes that MP3tunes' customers are the ones engaged in volitional acts of infringement."
In other words, "Hey, I didn't violate any copyright laws, MY CUSTOMERS DID!" Yikes!
Why would anyone want to be a customer of MP3tunes, given Robertson's position in this case? Do you really want to join a website, and if that site is sued for copyright violations, they then BLAME YOU for the infringement? The complaint goes on to say, "The person who actually presses the button to make the recoding supplies the necessary element of volition, not the person who manufactures, maintains, or, if distinct from the operator, owns the machine."
So Robertson creates a website, and because of how the site copies and stores files, YOU, an innocent, unsuspecting MP3tunes customer, could be blamed for any copyright infringement, simply for having used that site, because YOU "pushed the button." So much for Robertson defending his customers. I watched Robertson toss minority shareholders out of the way as he scrambled for a life raft as he sank Linspire. Now, he's tossing MP3tunes customers under the bus to defend his personal net worth. Not cool, but classic Robertson.
I would recommend to all my friends, family and associates to not be "pushing any buttons" at MP3tunes. If you do, Robertson will point the finger at you.
Kevin
Friday, October 16, 2009
Michael Robertson Loses in Court Again Today -- A Victory for Freedom of Speech!
Today, in a two-page ruling, Judge Steven R. Denton ruled against Michael Robertson in his motion for summary judgment with his lawsuit against me and the Freespire.com website. (Robertson wants to squash free speech and force freespire.com to be taken down because the site brings to light many of Robertson's questionable actions.) You can read the Tentative Ruling here, which was certified today in court.
Score: Freedom of Speech: 1 -- Michael Robertson: 0
In Judge Denton's ruling, he sites the nine different factors to be considered in such a trademark/domain name case, and then rightly concludes that the majority of these nine factors "weigh in the Defendant's favor." Score a point for freedom of speech.
A company can't force a site down on the basis of a trademark, just because the site is critical of that company or its management. Judge Denton addresses this concept in his ruling, "One of the ACPA's main objectives is the protection of consumers from slick internet peddlers who trade on the names and reputations of established brands. The practice of informing fellow consumers of one's experience with a particular service provider is surely not inconsistent with this ideal." For Robertson to prevail, he would have had to shown that I confused users at the Freespire.com website and that I then profited from that confusion. Considering I have never profited one dime from the Freespire.com site, that's a pretty ridiculous claim. Likewise, anyone can visit the freespire.com site and see if they think anyone could possibly be confused into assuming the site was part of Linspire.
I estimate (based on all the paper work filed by Robertson in the case), that so far Robertson has spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $50,000 on this lawsuit. I have spent next to nothing in my defense, and yet today I prevailed. It's nice having the law on your side. Lawyers have a saying, "If the law is on your side, argue the law. If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If neither is on your side, pound the table." Today Robertson blew thousands of dollars having his legal team "pound the table," but fortunately, the law and the facts carried the day in Judge Denton's courtroom this morning.
Michael Robertson loses. Judge Denton keeps
free speech alive at Freespire.com website.
As I've reported previously in my blog, the Freespire.com website is "dedicated to shedding light on the REAL Michael Robertson." (Visit: Freespire.com) I have seen Robertson go to great lengths to try and create a public persona which is very different from the one you will hear about from those who know him. Therefore, at Freespire.com, visitors can learn about the REAL Michael Robertson, directly from those who have worked closely with him.
I'm sure Robertson's lawyers get tired of losing, but as long as Robertson is crazy enough to pay them, I'm sure they'll gladly keep taking his money, even when they know the cases are groundless, no-win cases for Robertson. We all know what they say about a fool and his money...
Kevin
Score: Freedom of Speech: 1 -- Michael Robertson: 0In Judge Denton's ruling, he sites the nine different factors to be considered in such a trademark/domain name case, and then rightly concludes that the majority of these nine factors "weigh in the Defendant's favor." Score a point for freedom of speech.
A company can't force a site down on the basis of a trademark, just because the site is critical of that company or its management. Judge Denton addresses this concept in his ruling, "One of the ACPA's main objectives is the protection of consumers from slick internet peddlers who trade on the names and reputations of established brands. The practice of informing fellow consumers of one's experience with a particular service provider is surely not inconsistent with this ideal." For Robertson to prevail, he would have had to shown that I confused users at the Freespire.com website and that I then profited from that confusion. Considering I have never profited one dime from the Freespire.com site, that's a pretty ridiculous claim. Likewise, anyone can visit the freespire.com site and see if they think anyone could possibly be confused into assuming the site was part of Linspire.
I estimate (based on all the paper work filed by Robertson in the case), that so far Robertson has spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $50,000 on this lawsuit. I have spent next to nothing in my defense, and yet today I prevailed. It's nice having the law on your side. Lawyers have a saying, "If the law is on your side, argue the law. If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If neither is on your side, pound the table." Today Robertson blew thousands of dollars having his legal team "pound the table," but fortunately, the law and the facts carried the day in Judge Denton's courtroom this morning.
Michael Robertson loses. Judge Denton keepsfree speech alive at Freespire.com website.
As I've reported previously in my blog, the Freespire.com website is "dedicated to shedding light on the REAL Michael Robertson." (Visit: Freespire.com) I have seen Robertson go to great lengths to try and create a public persona which is very different from the one you will hear about from those who know him. Therefore, at Freespire.com, visitors can learn about the REAL Michael Robertson, directly from those who have worked closely with him.
I'm sure Robertson's lawyers get tired of losing, but as long as Robertson is crazy enough to pay them, I'm sure they'll gladly keep taking his money, even when they know the cases are groundless, no-win cases for Robertson. We all know what they say about a fool and his money...
Kevin
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Have Skype and eBay Lost Their Minds?
I hope not.
As an avid Skype user and an eBay shareholder (NASDAQ: EBAY), I hope there is no truth to the rumor that Skype may be considering spending crazy money on acquiring the lackluster Gizmo5. As an eBay shareholder (Skype's current parent company), I can certainly think of better things to be spending capital on than a seemingly desperate competitor that I have to believe must be drowning in red ink. Even if Skype can use some of Gizmo5 tech, they shouldn't overpay.
Having worked with Michael Robertson for six years as President and CEO for Linspire (another Robertson company), I know all his pitch techniques. Skype (or any other possible suitors), as part of any due diligence, should email me to talk. They'll want to review the public history in other "deals" Robertson has made. Skype should get a full accounting of Gizmo5's engineering team and speak with each engineer personally to find out how long they have been there. If it's tech and engineers Skype is looking for, they should make sure Gizmo5 still has any.
Have eBay and Skype lost their minds?
I have to believe this is just a rumor. I simply can't believe eBay and Skype would be interested in Gizmo5, at least not at the ridiculous numbers eluded to in some articles. I wouldn't be surprised if it was Robertson himself floating the rumors that he has suitors, all in an effort to drum up speculation of an acquisition. When Robertson sold MP3.com to Vivendi Universal, it became apparent soon after that Vivendi had paid tens of millions too much. Hopefully eBay and Skype are smarter than Vivendi was back then.
If eBay/Skype would be crazy enough to pay ANYWHERE NEAR $50 M for Gizmo5, then I have some swampland in Afghanistan they might be interested in.
Call me,
Kevin
As an avid Skype user and an eBay shareholder (NASDAQ: EBAY), I hope there is no truth to the rumor that Skype may be considering spending crazy money on acquiring the lackluster Gizmo5. As an eBay shareholder (Skype's current parent company), I can certainly think of better things to be spending capital on than a seemingly desperate competitor that I have to believe must be drowning in red ink. Even if Skype can use some of Gizmo5 tech, they shouldn't overpay.
Having worked with Michael Robertson for six years as President and CEO for Linspire (another Robertson company), I know all his pitch techniques. Skype (or any other possible suitors), as part of any due diligence, should email me to talk. They'll want to review the public history in other "deals" Robertson has made. Skype should get a full accounting of Gizmo5's engineering team and speak with each engineer personally to find out how long they have been there. If it's tech and engineers Skype is looking for, they should make sure Gizmo5 still has any.
Have eBay and Skype lost their minds?I have to believe this is just a rumor. I simply can't believe eBay and Skype would be interested in Gizmo5, at least not at the ridiculous numbers eluded to in some articles. I wouldn't be surprised if it was Robertson himself floating the rumors that he has suitors, all in an effort to drum up speculation of an acquisition. When Robertson sold MP3.com to Vivendi Universal, it became apparent soon after that Vivendi had paid tens of millions too much. Hopefully eBay and Skype are smarter than Vivendi was back then.
If eBay/Skype would be crazy enough to pay ANYWHERE NEAR $50 M for Gizmo5, then I have some swampland in Afghanistan they might be interested in.
Call me,
Kevin
Friday, July 31, 2009
Michael Robertson's Two Years of Silence to Linspire Shareholders
Michael Robertson loves to talk, except to shareholders.
Today, July 31, 2009, marks the two-year anniversary of me having resigned from Linspire. (I resigned after Michael Robertson tried to take advantage of several long-term employees, whom he later called embezzlers for having taken fair severance payments. Class-act move Robertson.)
At the time of my resignation, in an effort to save the company (which I was certain Robertson would destroy in short order), I offered to purchase control of the company by buying up stock for around $.50 a share (in cash). Robertson didn't even respond to my offer, and in under a year, the company was gone. Robertson tried to save face by saying he had sold the assets to Xandros in a back-room deal. Knowing this was a sham, and that Linspire stock was now worthless, I offered to let Robertson purchase my shares for ONE FIFTH of what I had offered to buy it for only ten months prior ($.10 per share). Of course, he knew the company wasn't worth anything and didn't accept the offer.
So, here we are, two years later, and around 100 shareholders have not heard what happened to their investment in Linspire. Anyone thinking of investing in Robertson should look carefully at how he has treated the Linspire shareholders, employees, customers, partners, etc.
Below is some toilet paper I purchased yesterday and a copy of my Linspire stock certificate. Can you guess which one is worth more?
One roll of toilet paper: $1.19
694,328 shares of Linspire stock: Worthless
At least the toilet paper is twin-ply, soft and absorbent.
I had offered to BUY Linspire shares at $.50 per share, and in the blink of an eye, Robertson had turned it into less than the value of a roll of toilet paper. Greedy, unethical AND incompetent. No wonder he's a coward to face the shareholders.
Kevin
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Michael Robertson Wins for the Craziest Digital Music Idea
Michael Robertson, always the wanna-be defender of the little guy (while stepping all over shareholders, former employees, vendors, customers, musicians, partners, copyright holders, etc.), asked in his latest blog for people to vote for the "Craziest Digital Music Ideas Ever."
Boy, he sure forget a whopper from his list:
Boy, he sure forget a whopper from his list:
My.MP3 - Michael Robertson's pet project which tanked MP3.com from a market cap in the billions to millions. MP3.com went public for over $25 per share, and ultimately sold for under $6 per share. (I'm not sure my dog could have done that poorly.) As usual with Robertson, many investors lost big and employees who held stock options were left underwater, and the artists and customers (who Robertson built MP3.com on the backs of) lost a once-promising website. Of course, Robertson made off big, even if most other shareholders didn't.
Why it was crazy: Because it blatantly violated copyright law, and handed MP3.com the largest judgment for copyright infringement in history. "The complex marvels of cyberspatial communication may create difficult legal issues; but not in this case. Defendant's (MP3.com) infringement of plaintiffs' copyrights is clear." ~ Judge Rakoff
When I get asked, "How do you start a small business?" I answer, "Buy a big one, let Michael Robertson run it, and wait awhile." Robertson never wanted to be known as a "one trick poney." I never understood that. What was his FIRST successful "pony?" Destroying MP3.com?
Kevin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
