Highlights

 

Fundraising History

  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /usr/www/users/pvnotes/includes/file.inc on line 647.
Related Terms:

Since 2003, ParkerVision has raised over $132M in multiple private placements, a warrent exercise and an asset sale. A summary is provided below:

 

 

  Type $ Shares (M) Warrants (M) 10K Due
Mar 27/Nov 14, 2003 PIPE $24.12M     Mar 31
Feb 26, 2004 Asset Sale $14M     Mar 15
Mar 14, 2005 PIPE $20.2M     Mar 15
Feb 3, 2006 PIPE $17.8M     Mar 15
Feb 23, 2007 PIPE $8.4M     Mar 15
Q3 2007 Warrents $6.5M      
Mar 6, 2008 PIPE $9.3M     Mar 15
Feb 26, 2009 PIPE

$10.5M

6.00   Mar 15
Apr 1, 2009 PIPE $0.42M 0.25    
Nov 16, 2009 PIPE $16.0M 8.00    
Nov 3, 2010 PIPE $4.36M 8.58 4.29  
Nov 19, 2010 PIPE $1.19M 2.83    
Total since 2003    $132.79      

 

 Fundraising

Since announcing that it would diversify into D2D technology 2003, and D2P technology in 2005, ParkerVision has consummated 8-10 private placements (not including Warrant exercises in 2007 and and Asset Sale in 2004), roughly at 12 month intervals. Based on this history and the company’s financial statements, we anticipate that ParkerVision will seek another private placement late 2007/early 2008 to meet its cash needs. (Added note: the private placement of $9.3M occurred on March 6, 2008 - right on schedule.) Without these additional funds, ParkerVision would not have been able to get a "Going Concern" opinion in the 2007 10K (due on March 15, 2008). There don't appear to be any new participants in the 2008 PIPE - all of the significant players were involved in previous PIPES. Note that Europa International is KOM/Knoll Capital - run by Fred Knoll.

 

If we take a closer look at the fluctuations in the stock price (graph below, red arrow indicates private placement event) and ParkerVision’s fundraising history, we see a cyclical pattern emerge over the past three years: the stock price is pumped as much as possible (usually to a range between $10 and $15) prior to the financing, and is then allowed to settle to a “bottom” of around $4, before it is pumped again for a another financing. Also note that the trading volumes typically increase sharply prior to and after a financing, and during any rapid decrease of the stock price.
stocks

Given that ParkerVision has sufficient cash until Q3 2008, we anticipate that the company will probably try to raise additional funding in Q1 2008. Note: as of Dec 2007, we have heard that the company is already out looking for another PIPE deal.

 

Although there are claims by ParkerVision that some cell phone companies have looked at the company for investment or acquisition, our contacts at the market leaders (both US and Asia) have indicated no interest in D2P technology. In fact, most large Asian OEM handset makers are very conservative, and will wait for one OEM to ship several million handsets with a new component before making any commitments themselves. Therefore, penetration into the OEM market with new technologies is exceedingly difficult, especially for a small newcomer like ParkerVision. This situation is analogous to early 2005, when ParkerVision offered itself for acquisition by Broadcom and was turned down. With respect to licensing, most of the companies that we have contacted have indicated that they see no value in licensing D2P technology (and especially not at the licencing terms that ParkerVision is seeking!). Furthermore, our contacts at ParkerVision’s competitors have indicated that the company has all but disappeared from the marketplace.