Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
IH Admin [Matt]: this is, you are, ridiculous ... do you even derive any money from this? good luck and good riddence good fellow.
Matt, your guess why I won't; and, why your pseudo-control is laughable
Matt, what did I do wrong?
hey Matt, what did I do wrong?
hey Matt, what did I do wrong?
thank you rachelelise. My point wis simply: the HP/IBMs' (i.e., OEMs of any flavor) WILL be selling Waves IP to the extent that they make end-use widgets that incorporate TPMs -- the behemoth marketing departments/armies at the likes of HP or IBM or Fujitsu or NEC or Comcast or NewsCorp/DirecTV will rabidly strive for marketshare ... Wave's not poised to become an Intel -- a design/fab/marketing powerhouse -- Wave's more analogous to Rambus (ticke: RMBS)
Horse, we all share the market, right? yeah, I don't understand ... does Microsoft have favorable [to Microsoft] marketshare?...
Horseman, brilliant person you are, ever hear of the Hirschman-Herfindahl Index?
http://pioneer.netserv.chula.ac.th/~ckieatvi/Fathom_Bus_Con.htm
Enjoy the ride -- simple minds make for the sound reasoning; high-brow attitude minds make for window dressing.
Horse, marketshare is clearly what it's all about; BUT, do you see Qualcomm marketing it's IP? the marketshare grows due to demand -- simple; either Wave's IP is a no-brainer to sell [by the likes of HP, IBM etc.] in volume or Wave withers on the vine -- WAVE will not be the marketing juggernaut you allude to.
scorp, my apology, oh wise one .... not
tommyboy, we're NOT doomed; only in the dark.
scorp, no need to disabuse myself -- $100/sh, eh? in 2005 or 2006? Are you certain Wave will remain independent a la Qualcomm? Will Wave management remain intact? Please share your view scorp, if you will.
p.s. my basis is now around $1.80 per share
kudos scorp. that IS indeed the elegance of this investment: apparently, Wave's IP will garner it due licensing revenues from any TCG endorsed application -- AND Wave doesn't have to lift a finger after the RAND arrangement(s) is hammered out.
24601, the "goons" I speak of are those individuals who merrily march down the road beleiving the pot of gold is inevitably waiting for them -- NO, it does not take unusual perspicacity to grasp the precariousness of Wave's position!
On my "theory", rest assured I'm not absolutely convinced; however, to not acknowledge the potentially manipulative tactics of behemoth corps (and associated financial expert advisors)with a vast opportunity for future revenues at stake, is ludicrous.
hey Horse, at this point, presuming that Wave's IP functionally embedded in products incorporating the TPMs of NTRU/NSM et al., why would Wave "reinvest capitol to go after market share"?!
Think.
Wave's reinvested capital will be aimed at R&D and biz-development. Just the same as Wave is not and does not want to be a "chip co.", Wave is not and does not want to be a marketing co. -- do you think the early years paltry budget of Wave will have any marketing impact whatsoever in comparison to the marketing heft of TCG?
Think.
scorp, I wholly agree: the WAVX train is rolling down the hill, with a mile-long string of heavy carloads behiond it, and there is little that anyone can do to stop it.
BUT, what we do not know is: will that "mile-long string of heavy carloads behiond it" roll over WAVX as the market fully emerges?
go-kite, PROMOTION is only pursuit of mindshare at this point, as the market is only now being developed
awk, you sound like the rest of the goons here who refuse to acknowledge the precariousness of Wave's current position. The motive(s) behind the SEC/class-action debacle may very well be sourced from major-players seeking to erode at Wave's competitive position -- EVER THINK OF THAT?! DIVERSIONARY SABOTAGE?!!!
...FAR TO MANY HERE WHO INSIST ON KEEPING THEIR HEAD UP THEIR... OR IN THE SAND.
s5, I hope you're right. However, HOW can you "tell" what sks' main goal right now is? Are you certain the SEC investigation has no merit?... AND, if SKS's goal is about "market share", how do you figure he has any control over that?... far as i know, biz-development shops the goods around; HOWVEVER, true "market share" pursuit is achieved through advertising, marketing & sales, of which Wave has effectively none.
Wave is a captive player to the TCG gorillas -- it's the TCG gorillas who will set the rules and vie for "market share". SKS can only perservere and persistently remind the TCG gorillas of what Wave is owed, as defined by the TCG RAND licensing arrangement.
bowWAVE, you should follow your instinct -- BUT, know that it surely won't drop to $1.59 .... whatever.
rachelelise, "still to tough to call"? yes. as it's always been. guesses, inferences and speculation is the best anyone here can do. only true DD can be done with facts and face it, WE HAVE NOT EVEN HALF THE STORY!
Doma/Mig, what to expect of IDF or RSA?! EXPECT that Wave will be involved in panel discussions and demos. Ain't gonna see anything until there's (1) contracts to announce; and/or, (2) resolution to the SEC/class-action debacle; and/or, (3) SKS/Feeney stepping down in shame.
thanks Mig ... prescient indeed. Glad to see we have such an expert sage amoung us ... "pull back will not be to the 1.59 area in one day"
boom, nice soliloquy ... feeling better?
Horseman?: "Need to know just HOW MUCH of Infineon's
software overlaps with ours/NTRU."
Is this not the more relevant question/need: How much is the Wave-IP-based-componant of the total TPM device/framework worth (i.e., according to the TCG, RAND licensing fee arrangement involving all participating entities) relative to the other contributing members' integrated TPM componants?
Is NOT this game about what can be monetized? and for HOW MUCH?
I believe, to get lost in how Wave's contribution fits -- which, presumably, we can assume it "fits" to the extent that it's been "adopted" in the TCG scheme -- is of diminished return at this point.
What matters now is how Wave will be remunerated for its contribution!
Horseman?: "How much security is offered clients with just the "the nuts and bolts" software of Infineon or IBM. Hmmm."
It is what[ever] it is; only when TCG spells out it's RAND policy details, will we know the answers you seek ... one caveat: NSM announces orders [from OEMs] for its Wave-imbued TPM, and NSM provides a schematic of what TPM componants/configurations are available
zen and all: Nancy Sumrall(@Intel) RULES RM. 2007!!!!
Intel to Demonstrate Wave’s EMBASSY® Trust Suite Services Across Multiple Vendors’ Trusted Platforms at the Intel Booth at the RSA Security 2003 Trade Show
Wave Delivers Industry’s First Cross Platform Trusted Applications and Services Portfolio
San Francisco, CA – April 7, 2003
Nancy Sumrall SAYS: "Intel is pleased to demonstrate Wave’s suite of trusted services on TPM enabled Intel platforms at RSA 2003. It is important that the OEMs and the industry in general begin to deliver these TPM based services which can interoperate amongst all of the secure platforms that will be deployed over the next few years. Wave’s insights in the development and delivery of these trusted services are just the beginning of bringing a whole new level of value to the PC platform," said Nancy Sumrall, safer computing initiative manager, Desktop Platforms Group at Intel.
Mig, up your after-burners -- smelly hot air is not my aim.
Mig, 'twas a buy-only trade .... are you kidding?
waverider, 6-8 mos. wait?
i agree, given my large window of missed opportunity [on well-performing stocks] ... now may not be the time to bail, assuming Wave:
(1) doesn't further dilute, due to no appreciable revenue and needing additonal funding;
(2) management is found [by the SEC] to have acted improperly; (3) doesn't have to make a significant payout to settle the lawsuits;
(4) finally makes some money?...
(5) gets some real business management expertise at the helm.
ya' TA folks ought to be T&A folks so you may actually find some enjoyment and pleasure ... WAVX and TA are worse than oil & water in terms of compatibility doesn't TA factor in revenue stream(s) and p/e ratios? enjoy your warped world -- T&A makes the world go 'round and TA makes only your world go wacky.
ya' TA folks ought to be T&A folks so you may actually find some enjoyment and pleasure ... WAVX and TA are worse than oil & water in terms of compatibility doesn't TA factor in revenue stream(s) and p/e ratios? enjoy your warped world -- T&A makes the world go 'round and TA makes only your world go wacky.
Doma, 1 question: w/o the "PJS-patent" -- originally granted in 1988 and, then revised/updated with an issuance date in 1993, thereby allegedly extending its valid life until 2010 -- what is the marketvalue of "what Wave currently offers"?!
Because you maintain that you "keep up with my [your] investment & try to understand" maybe you can share with those of us here that lack certain insights ... which componants of IP attributable to Wave are of the most value?
I'd almost be offended by your holier than thou attitude towards me but, I know I am no less uninformed than you are.
p.s. I've bought and sold many times since 2001, very unfortunately not at $40+ -- shares and option; however, i hold a core chunk on my belief that Wave will succeed. I'll never not play devil's advocate until someone can demonstrate w/o doubt that they have a verifiable answer.
internet, Please point to my flawed argument -- UNTIL we see the precise relative valuation of Wave's IP in the TCG RAND licensing arrangements, no one [of us] can state unequivocally that Wave's position is pre-eminent.
My bet is on Wave's position is pre-eminent ... but, it ain't real 'til it's real
Doma, my apology for assuming your comprehension capabilities could make the leap from (1) caution about a very real threat to Wave's integrity, to (2) acknowledging what true value Wave brings to the marketplace ... Wave's original IP (thanks to PJS starting in 1988, and well-augmented since) is it's ace in the hole, NOT its deep bench of mathematicians, scientists and engineers.
whatever Doma. Lighten up and you may realize ya' ain't as smart as you're convinced that you are.
Ntru and Wave
Ntru's management team's credentials are quite impressive:
http://www.ntru.com/about/management.htm
And, Ntru's apparently taken Wave under it's wing:
http://www.ntru.com/products/ntru_wave.pdf
Did I say Wave UNDER Ntru's wing?!!... actually, YES, as I see it -- because it's Wave's IP that guarantees it only a space at the table; it's not Wave's management team's credentials that got Wave an invite to the table:
http://www.wavesys.com/about/corp_back.html
(Wave's management team credentials aren't even set forth on the website)
This credentials NUANCE, I suggest, leads to THIS najor difference; the credentialled academics at Ntru gain funding (investment) from industry players that recognize proven technical expertise and relationships:
http://www.ntru.com/about/investors.htm
Whereas, Wave gets funding (investment) through friends/family private-placements at less than favorable [to Wave] rates and conditions.
No, I'm not bashing Wave; I hold more WAVX shares than ever before. HOWEVER, I recognize that it's Wave IP (stemming from PJS's first patent due to expire in 2010) that keeps doors open for Wave.
I've followed/owned WAVX since '99/'00 -- 4-5 years later, Wave's only 6 years from PJS's first patent expiration... adequate but less than optimal (SKS openly admitted to effectively dropping the ball on early peter-meter opportunities).
The stars seem to be lining up for Wave -- let's hope SKS & co. aren't found [by the SEC] to have screwed up, thereby screwing shareholders as well.
Good luck to all. Maybe one day soon, this WAVX mess will go away and real, savvy business leaders will properly guide Wave Systems.
With all due respect for SKS, he is not the player his dad was; I beleive SKS is doing his best -- LET US HOPE SKS DOESN'T LET HIS EGO GET IN THE WAY OF SERVING WAVE SYSTEMS' SHAREHOLDERS BEST INTERESTS... that's how a public co. is supposed operate isn't it?
Thankfully, some of the techno-smart openly associate with Wave; if left soley to the business/marketing savvy sharks, Wave would have even less clout.
QUALITY OFFERINGS BEGET ATTENTION OF FINANCIERS; QUESTIONABLY MANAGED QUALITY OFFERINGS BEGET ATTENTION OF SHARKS.
yeah Thig, SKS at the helm is comforting. We all know the Spragues' don't play favorites ... not in employees nor PP participants.
I have a more and more sinking feeling that an investment made in WAVX based on the reputable character of it's founder (PJS) is becoming sketchy at best.
I give SKS the benefit-of-the-doubt to the extent he's an engineer by training -- i.e., things are cool, stay tuned let's be happy etc. etc. -- however, while SKS has advanced Wave's client-side mantra very well, i believe financial management of Wave falls into the category of Howie-Dean-for-Prez, wherein his campaign management (oops, is that Joe Trippi?) burned through $40 mil only to look around at each other and wondered: where did the good times go?
I hope I'm mistaken but, I think this SEC/Class-action debacle stemmed from a savvy mind(s) just waiting for a slip-up by Wave management to derail the technically focused momentum at Wave, thereby eroding at Wave's clout at the negotiating table.
Call me a dooms-day nay-sayer but, I think Wave's on the ropes worse than it's ever been, funds notwithsatnding --
QUALITY OFFERINGS BEGET ATTENTION OF FINANCIERS; QUESTIONABLY MANAGED QUALITY OFFERINGS BEGET ATTENTION OF SHARKS.
wavehello, your "perfunctory examination" is clearly without bearing. An allegation is just that ...
The SEC acts as it is required to do.
Lawyers catch the scent of an animal in the cross-hairs and pile on hoping to further satiate their ever-present greed.
The animal in the cross-hairs is required to expend limited resources unnecesarily.
Further vulnerabilty of the animal in the cross-hairs benefits who?
How is the relative position of "strength" of the vulnerable animal in the cross-hairs veiwed by others at the negotiating table?
I maintain that certain powers-that-be amongst the TCG founding member cos. are not keen on playing ball with SKS.
Said powers-that-be merely wait for SKS to slip up in the slightest and POUNCE.
This isn't a game wherein said powers-that-be give a nod to the underdog -- it's a game worth billions of dollars and no one is playing nice.
Let's hope that the breadth and [pocketbook] depth of Sprague supporters and friends and is enough to carry Wave Systems through!
Dutchbj, you're right on! Construction of the requisite infrastructure is has been committed to by the big-boys w/deep pockets -- THIS IBM/Eagle joint-venture is precisely the type of framework within which TCG solutions will be integral to successful operation.
The only remaining issue relative to WAVX shareprice behaviour is how Wave's IP is valued in the context of TCG's RAND licensing arrangements.
While this IBM/Eagle joint-venture is testimony to the coming of mass-market digital distribution, IT DOES NOT, HOWEVER, GUARANTEE the success of Wave Systems or appreciation of WAVX.
As you alluded Dutchbj, it's STILL ALL ABOUT THE CASH IN WAVE'S COFFERS -- 'til that materializes in a recurring growing fashion, it's all just smoke-in-mirrors ... I'M NOT TRASHIN' YOU Dutchbj, I'M MERELY RECOGNIZING THAT IT 'T'AINT OVER 'TIL IT'S OVER!!
GREAT FIND BY THE BY!
Snackman, all the best to you. Upon reflection, we must all find our comfort zone. Enjoy.
thanks howard_b_golden. see ya there ...