I agree 2015 won't do it and never ever thought Bell_ID was part of pre-2015, nor has the company IMO. I certainly agree, and said so at the time, that the inclusion of the word "August" in the LOI PR was IMO a bad idea. The words should have been "near future" and I suspect the complexities of this deal exceeded their experience set. Were they an insurance/banking company e.g. I would have felt they were better staffed to be able to sign a "definitive agreement" in the time frame they afforded themselves by use of the word "August". I am unaware of Wave or anybody they have recently bragged of hiring with anything that I would humbly consider to be the experience set to close such an agreement (something I remarked on a while ago). Obviously (IMO) they pushed for the Bell_ID PR because Bell-ID EMV was something they wanted to talk about. One can measure the "August" word as a red-flaggable event or not. Given that even a material event definitive agreement would not have been material to me (I can't see any path towards near term revenue which is what counts for me), the inclusion of the word "August" or the failure to PR progression of the Bell-ID thingy is not red-flaggable to me (hence WTFKOC). Again, as you said 2015 won't do it, and as on my radar Bell_ID is not and has never been a 2014 thingy, it drifts towards inconsequential minutia. Events required in 2014 dwarf, eclipse, preempt, supersede (whatever word one wants) to the point that a DA in August is, to me, inconsequential minutia. The stated goal of Wave EMV is to get a piece of a piece of a subset of transactions for which I am not aware of their currently being the necessary infrastructure. 2015 might be ambitious.
The above content is my opinion.
