512

Written by Peter Li-Chang Kuo

(Chinese)

After “Panhornic ComMec Inc.” (PCI) suffered a devastating robbery on January 27, 2001, the company was no longer able to complete its planned NT$500 million factory project in Taichung Port within the required six-month period and was forced to withdraw from the investment. Nevertheless, the remaining capital was still sufficient to pursue a NASDAQ listing.

As a result, I contacted Merrill Lynch to begin the preparatory work and also brought her to the United States to meet with Merrill Lynch’s working team.

Fig 1: Linda Din Visiting Merrill Lynch in the U.S.

Merrill Lynch emphasized that the total assets under its management exceeded “US$1.7 trillion,” demonstrating to President Linda Din its capability to handle highly complex cross-border capital operations.

Fig 2: Merrill Lynch's professional endorsement

The Genesis invention created by the “Mother of E-Commerce,” Linda Din, had not only helped promote the establishment of the “E-Commerce Constitution” at APEC 1998, but the “ICT Initiative” proposed during the 2000 Brunei APEC meetings had also gained broad consensus and was expected to be incorporated into the Leaders’ Declaration at the 2001 Shanghai APEC summit.

As early as October 1998, I had already explained in Silicon Valley that TES had succeeded in winning recognition for "E-Commerce Legislation," and that the "TranSmart Chip" used in TES could “store data, numbers, text, voice, and images.” By 2001, I was again bringing the book "The Daughter of a Defense Employee" (Linda Din, 2001) to Silicon Valley to share these ideas. Unfortunately, most people remained deeply immersed in the illusion of the “dot-com” (.com) era. Even by 2007, many were still trapped in the lingering dream of "PDAs." In short, the casualties were enormous.

On page 171 of the book, under the section “The Origin of the TranSmart Chip Card,” it clearly states that the card could “store data, numbers, text, voice, and images.” This was precisely the direction we continuously advocated from APEC 1997 through 2009.

Fig 3: Page 171 of the Book

After Taiwan’s Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) approved PCI’s "NT$500 million" Taichung Port factory proposal in 2000, officials suddenly demanded that President Linda Din sign an additional agreement requiring the factory to be completed “within six months.”

Back in 1972, when I built the "Baisheng Metal Company factory" on Chong-Cheng South Road in Yongkang, the site was also roughly one hectare in size. At the time, Premier Chiang Ching-Kuo had imposed a comprehensive construction ban, leaving an oversupply of construction laborers. Even so, after six months we had only managed to complete a basic sheet-metal factory building, and it was already extremely difficult.

Fig 4: News Report on the NT$500 Million Taichung Port Factory Project

PCI’s planned products were “pico-meter” (1 × 10⁻¹² m) class TranSmart Chips and high-tech cyber-security related products. The project therefore required reinforced concrete cleanroom facilities — not something that could magically appear overnight. How could such a factory possibly be completed within six months?

I advised Big President Din to negotiate further with the MOEA, but she remained highly confident. Unfortunately, confidence was defeated by harsh reality. On January 27, 2001, all of PCI’s assets were robbed. Merely restoring the written documentation took more than half a year, making it absolutely impossible to complete the factory project on schedule.

Reluctantly, Linda Din terminated the construction project and formally canceled the agreement with the Ministry of Economic Affairs. Yet only six months later, the Ministry unexpectedly filed a lawsuit under the pretext of “raising land rent.” The daughter of a defense employee, who had passionately sought to help revitalize Taiwan’s economy under the Chen Shui-Bian administration, was sued into illness.

As someone known for deeply caring for my wife, I ultimately had no choice but to pay compensation to the Ministry in exchange for the withdrawal of the lawsuit.

After several days of recovery, the internationally recognized “Mother of E-Commerce,” Linda Din, finally accepted the suggestion from William and myself to prepare for a NASDAQ listing.

In fact, after the commotion surrounding the 1997 Vancouver APEC meetings, William had already proposed pursuing a NASDAQ listing first. In hindsight, spending those years manufacturing real machine of TES while simultaneously exposing “TES’s underlying confidential technologies” on global intellectual property websites truly consumed resources on both fronts. Fortunately, under persecution from the MOEA, we were ultimately redirected toward the international capital markets — proving the old saying: “What is lost in the east may be gained in the west.”

Fig 5: Linda Din at APEC 1997

Although the factory project consumed a considerable amount of money, there was still substantial capital remaining after cutting losses. Since preparing for a NASDAQ listing would take two to three years, the funds would not be spent all at once.

Because I had helped establish the sister-city relationship between Tainan and San Jose in 1974, and later built "a direct bridge between Taiwan and Silicon Valley" in 1979, my activities in Silicon Valley were centered primarily around Santa Clara. As a result, I paid close attention to nearby companies manufacturing components related to the "TranSmart Electronic Payment System" — and that was how I discovered "NVIDIA."

“US$2.60 per share.”

At that time, the price at which I bought NVIDIA stock was only “US$2.60 per share.”

Even back in October 1998, after I shared in Silicon Valley the good news that TES had effectively won recognition for e-commerce legislation, we continued placing long-term “advertisement of TES” in the Monte Jade Science and Technology Association of West Coast (MJW) publications to explain the benefits of TES.

Fig 6: TES Advertisement in MJW

The “TranSmart Chip Card, VAM, eStore, and TSCM” mentioned in the MJW advertisement were precisely the underlying foundational logic for what would later evolve into “AI” (Artificial Intelligence).

The collective blindness in Silicon Valley eventually led to the 2001 “Dot-com Crash.” After NASDAQ collapsed, technology stocks plunged across the board. Investors lost confidence in “technology visions,” and valuations of semiconductor and internet companies were cut in half — or even reduced to one-tenth of their previous levels. Even though NVIDIA attempted a "stock split" (2-for-1) in hopes of improving liquidity, its share price still remained in the single digits.

At that time, Merrill Lynch, which was attempting to transition away from pure financial speculation toward "real industrial development," became extremely excited when it encountered this “highly integrated TES innovation industry.” In 2002, large teams from Merrill Lynch’s New York, Silicon Valley, and Singapore offices traveled to Taichung to personally witness President Linda Din demonstrate “the real machine of TES system.” Standing beside them, I could literally hear the rapid breathing of the investment banking elites as they watched the presentation.

Fig 7: Linda Din Demonstrating the Real Machine of TES

When Merrill Lynch’s Singapore team noticed the “Charity Donation” button on the VAM machine, they curiously asked about its purpose. Chairwoman Din replied:

“It is an innovative fundraising mechanism to support non-profit organizations (NPOs).”

They immediately understood the significance and responded:

“Then if there are 30 million VAM units, and each contributes just one dollar, that already creates US$30 million to support NPO initiatives. No wonder this is called Social Responsibility Investment (SRI).”

Fig 8: The “Charity Donation” Button on the VAM

“US$250 per share”

Through an industry-academia collaboration with National Taichung Institute of Technology, we conducted a limited patent valuation analysis using only patents from the United States, Japan, and China. The conclusion of the Patent & IPR Appraisal Report valued the intellectual property at "US$23.4 billion."

After reviewing the report, Merrill Lynch valued our listing entity — Panhornic ComMec Holding Co., Ltd. (PCH)— at “US$250 per share,” while PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) recommended that PCH issue 3 billion shares.

Fig 9: Patent & IPR Appraisal Report

Compared with many companies struggling with single-digit share prices, I became curious why a world-class investment bank like Merrill Lynch possessed such extraordinary confidence.

Merrill Lynch explained that, from the perspective of the global technology industry’s “structural bottlenecks,” our “TES” (The eStore System) had been described by APEC as a “Total Economic Solution” because:

First, it represented a highly complete “virtual-physical integration” business ecosystem — a fully integrated commercial closed loop, as illustrated in "Fig 3 of the Color Brochure."

Fig 10: The Color Brochure’s “Fig 3” and the Toller

Second, they had personally witnessed the operation of the TranSmart Chip Card and its Reader Device (TRD or Toller), and concluded that virtually every store, transaction venue, and identity-verification location in "the world would eventually require such installations."

The Merrill Lynch team’s conclusion was simple:

“From every angle, this is money.”

More importantly, they believed it could elevate human civilization to a higher level.

At the time, most Silicon Valley companies possessed only “concepts” or “single-function products” — such as search engines or web-based retail sites — while lacking sustainable profit models. Hollywood mockingly referred to this phenomenon as “Silicon Valley Blind Faith.”

By contrast, under Merrill Lynch’s perspective, the TES system — including VAM & eStore hardware, TSCM2000 management software, and the complete ecosystem of contactless TranSmart cards — represented a “next-generation infrastructure provider.”

The greatest pain point for online commerce at that time was the integration of “payment security” with “real-world deployment.” TES perfectly provided a verifiable and scalable transactional closed loop — an extremely rare asset in 2002.

Most importantly, TES was viewed as a “Genesis-level Invention.” Any later entrants hoping to participate in the system and share its benefits would need to obtain “licensing rights.” The potential value of “IP Recovery alone” was already enormous — beyond the scope of traditional accounting principles.

The Australian government later invited Chairwoman Linda Din to serve as a lecturer at APEC 2003, where she proposed “Global Channel-TES” to address the needs of SME exporters. TES was praised as the best practice for helping 240 million people start businesses.

Fig 11: Linda Din at APEC 2003 in Bangkok

After Linda Din delivered a speech in Chiang Mai APEC, she proceeded to the Bangkok conference venue to explain why TES represented a true “Global Channel.” Holding the color brochure, delegates asked about the projected economic output of TES. The speaker answered: “US$10 trillion — approximately 36% of APEC GDP.”

The entire Bangkok venue erupted in excitement. Soon afterward, numerous followers rushed to enter this social responsibility investment ecosystem. Badly, they are infringers.

Moreover, after returning to Taiwan, Linda Din encountered what may have been the highest-level coordinated attacks in human history. State apparatuses were fully mobilized — including the MOEA, the National Taxation Bureau, Prosecutors, Police, and Investigative Agency — fabricating accusations of “illegal fundraising and aiding communist bandits.” The internationally renowned “Mother of E-Commerce” was trapped on an isolated island and attacked from every direction.

On November 21, 2004, the Mother of E-Commerce was finally struck down — suffering loss of memory, speech, and cognitive function (amnesia, aphasia and dementia). After narrowly surviving, an even longer campaign of persecution followed.

Unfortunately, Merrill Lynch itself, which had once sought industrial transformation, was later swept away during the Global Financial Crisis and disappeared into history.

Why NVIDIA Shares Could Be Bought at US$2.60?

Around 2002, NVIDIA was generally regarded merely as a “computer component supplier,” heavily constrained by the cyclical nature of the IT industry. At the time, the market believed hardware component makers possessed limited profit margins.

Unlike PCH, which defined entirely “new industrial rules” (“New Industry, New Jobs”) through an integrated techno-economic system, NVIDIA was viewed only as a tool provider rather than a platform-level ecosystem leader. PwC recommended setting the PCH’s share count at 3 billion shares, saying: “Only then would there be enough to distribute.”

This reflected TES being positioned at the scale of a “Global Public Utility.” The deeper meaning of “enough to distribute” referred to the future allocation of benefits across the global industrial supply chain.

If a system was intended to solve "global unemployment" and establish e-commerce legislative standards, it would require enormous capital capacity to accommodate participation from governments, financial institutions, and multinational corporations worldwide. The large share structure was intended to provide sufficient “equity currency” for future cross-border mergers, technology licensing, and international standards promotion.

Meanwhile, NVIDIA was still perceived merely as a “tool provider,” with valuations fluctuating according to sales performance. That was why it became possible to buy NVIDIA shares at only “US$2.60 each” — because TES had not yet entered widespread commercial deployment, and therefore there was not yet strong demand for high-end chips or graphics processors.

However, after I successfully secured “satellite support” during the APEC CEO Summit 2006, the “TranSmrt chip card and its reading devices” began moving rapidly into everyday human activities involving payment settlement and identity authentication.

Fig 12: Securing “Satellite Support” at APEC 2006

In 2009, President Barack Obama invited me to contribute ideas for “Rebuilding the Global Economy” at the Singapore leaders’ meeting. There, I advocated “IIA-TES.” Combined with the emergence of smart mobile communication devices, the world gradually began entering the new techno-economic society that we had envisioned and shaped.

Demand for “business automation, precision electronics, advanced chips, sensing (induction) systems, ICT, and AI infrastructure” increased year after year. Civilization itself was transitioning from the era of “linear computing” toward one of “massively parallel computing.” As a result, the stock price and market capitalization of NVIDIA soared dramatically.

Fig 13: APEC 2009 — Rebuilding the Global Economy

How much "NVIDIA Shares" increased?

If NVIDIA shares purchased at "US$2.60 per share" in 2001 had been held until today, they would have gone through multiple stock splits, including: "2-for-1, 2-for-1, 2-for-1, 3-for-2, 4-for-1, and 10-for-1." The cumulative split multiplier would be approximately “480 times,” meaning that one original share would have become 480 shares today.

Using the “Final Stock Value Formula” — shown in Fig 12 — we can calculate the present value:

Fig 14: Final Stock Value Formula (Generated by AI)

Where:

V_t = Total value of holdings today

P₀= Original purchase price (Stock price to the power of zero)

N₀ = Original number of shares purchased

S_i = Multiplier of the i-th stock split

P_t = Current stock price

∏ = Product of all stock split multipliers

A single share purchased at US$2.60 in 2001, with today’s stock price at “US$219.44 per share,” after multiplying all historical splits: “2×2×2×1.5×4×10=480” and applying the overall formula: “Vt = 2.6⁰ × 1 × 480 × 219.44 ≈105,331.” The appreciation in value is therefore extremely substantial.

Conclusion

Truly great technology companies usually possess two characteristics simultaneously: "Exponential growth in enterprise value" and "Stock splits that expand liquidity and market participation." Together, these create a dual compounding effect: “Price Growth × Share Growth.” This was precisely why TES attracted the admiration of elite investment bankers at the time.

In 2002, the valuation gap between the two companies — differing by as much as one hundredfold — fundamentally reflected the contrast between: a “global commercial standards setter,” and a “single hardware component supplier.”

Yet the latter, operating within a free society, was able to continue expanding upward without limitation and eventually flourished.

Sadly, the former was relentlessly hunted by cartel forces, causing decades of effort to collapse into ruin. Most regrettably, Merrill Lynch, which had attempted to transform itself, ultimately disappeared from history during the financial crisis.

However, as of 2026, TES’s “Cashless Economy” alone has already become like a runaway train, with transaction volume reaching as high as “US$200 trillion.” Increasingly, people of vision are beginning to recognize the importance of the most critical element — the “brake system” — and hope that the original creators will once again exercise regulatory and balancing authority.

Over the past twenty years, although continuous cartel attacks eliminated the operating entities behind TES, they could not extinguish the intellectual property sovereignty of a “Genesis-level invention,” nor the mission of social responsibility investment (SRI). Moreover, it is said that the best time to establish another Buffett indicator.

Peter Li-Chang Kuo, the author created Taiwan's Precision Industry in his early years. Peter was a representative of the APEC CEO Summit and an expert in the third sector. He advocated "anti-corruption (AC)/cashless/e-commerce (E-Com)/ICT/IPR/IIA-TES / Micro-Business (MB)…and etc." to win the international bills and regulations.

【Copyrights reserved by Li-Chang Kuo & K-Horn Science Inc.】

External Links:

The Inventions of “Linda Din”：

https://patents.google.com/patent/US6304796 (VAM)

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030197061 (Shopping System)

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030107468 (Entry Security Device)

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040054595A1 (ETC)

https://ldinventions.blogspot.com/2022/01/127.html (A Universal Cashless System)

https://khornhb.blogspot.com/2023/10/1011.html (K-Horn Science Inc.)

https://klcapec.blogspot.com/2024/05/515.html (The Best Practice)

https://klcapec.blogspot.com/2024/06/609.html (Edison’s Inspiration)

https://khornhb.blogspot.com/2024/07/721.html (Paving the Way for AI)