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.
Matt: Observe the lunatics on the WAVX board...
as they continue to whine about every contrary view expressed, question the motivation of everyone who doesn't agree with them, suggest that discovering the identity of so-called bashers would be a good thing (Weby), etc., etc., etc.
This is a cult, Matt. And you, old boy, are a Cult-Monger. Ciao!
DIG SPACE: 24601 claims that he supports...
allowing me to post on the WAVX board, but I suspect he has been PMing Cult-Monger Matt to put the Kibosh on my prisoner exchange proposal. I'm willing to release 24601 from his 90 day enforced hiatus in exchange for either your or my release from the jailhouse. Seems like an entirely equitable transaction to me!
JBENETT: What do you suggest...
our "idiot" soldiers do? Mutiny? Obviously, you've never worn any sort of uniform beyond Cub Scout level. Judging by your message, you may not be old enough for that organization yet.
Matt: How about a prisoner exchange?
I release 24601 from his 90 day lock-up in exchange for the release of either dig space or myself. Your choice. (This is just one of my many magnanimous gestures).
P.S. If gloating is not allowed under the TOU, I don't want to leave.
24601: You'll have to serve your entire sentence...
I'm afraid. I'm not going to be quite as generous as I've been in the past. You'll just have to remain incommunicado for the next 90 days. All venues. All aliases. But look at it this way, revenues came in at 50% of your baseline figure. Eammon missed by 83%! Ciao!
eamonn: great call!
$300K in revenues.
Reality: $50K
fabulous prognostication
Actually, I was wrong yesterday...
when I said the company hadn't reduced its burn rate from Q1 '03. The operating expenses in that quarter were about $2.1 million per month and that came down, significantly, to $1.5 million per month in Q2 and Q3 before going back up to $1.9 million per month in Q4. So, in principle, Steven was right when he said the burn was reduced. I was wrong to say it wasn't. I still think he ought to know the number was $1.5 million not $1.2 million even if he can't keep straight whether it's a monthly or a quarterly figure. Anway, I was wrong. Won't be the last time.
P.S. to Fung Derf: The joker has to do with Wavoid Nation. Not worth boring the inmates with the details.
FUNG: You think the cult doesn't read me?
I guarantee you they know where I am and they read what I have to say. Hey, I know this stuff belongs on the WAVX board. I've prefaced about twenty of these with that remark myself. So, no, it ain't like I'm talkin to myself. And eamonn knows it. He reads every word I print in every venue it's printed, as does 24601 (who has taken to sending me private messages via IHUB, messages I cannot respond to privately).
And why do they read me? One reason. I've been the rightest person in the sorry history of this sorry company.
Read what SKS said about his "burn" rate...
from the same 2Q03 CC:
John Stewart, National Media: Hi, Steven. How are you today?
SKS: Just fine. How are you?
Stewart: I have to apologize. We worked together to make sure the heat rose, and that the pressure was raised, so that the answers would be good. <laughter> Just teasing.
Here's two questions that I have. The burn rate does not seem to be going down. We kept hearing it was going to come down, was going to come down. I'm not seeing it, but I'm not an expert. Is the burn rate coming down?
SKS: Yes. The burn rate has actually dropped pretty significantly. We were at above a million and a half per quarter, at the beginning of the year we're down around 1.2 million a quarter.
Stewart: A month
SKS: Yeah, sorry… 1.2 million
Stewart: I'm seeing at six two for the quarter…
SKS: Right.
Stewart: Six million two for the quarter
SKS: Right. So we've made some very significant steps in that direction. I think the company is pretty lean at this point. And we've been trying to maintain the balance between how do we make sure we satisfy our large customers in the market, they have tremendous demands, and at the same time make sure we are as lean as possible so we have as much resource as possible. I think we have a very good balance on that. We've been able to execute well. We've been able to deliver our product on time. It's very important in this marketplace. And yet we are also comfortable, we have more than sufficient runway to get where we want to go.
*************************
Just for the record, the burn rate--meaning the operating expenses (r&d, selling, g&a) were running $1.5 million per month in the first two quarters of 03 and then jumped to $1.9 million per month in Q4. Even granting he merely misspoke in saying it was down to $1.2 million per quarter, he was still off by $300k a month. The burn rate didn't drop a penny from Q1. What in the hell was the guy talking about?
I'm sorry, but a CEO ought to have a better grasp of the figures than that. The whole conversation was too pathetic. Sonny-boy, Steven K. Sprague, eldest son of founder Peter Sprague is just totally inept, not to mention having little respect for the truth. He's articulate, at times, but he's just a complete joke as a CEO. No company on NASDAQ would have tolerated his obvious incompetence and his many misleading remarks for this long. No. Only a cult. A cult of fools, at that.
Here's what the man said in August 2001...
August 7, 2001, to be exact,
in response to a query about the "makability" of the $21 million revenue projection for that year (put forward by PGE, but defended by management).
(bolds mine)
********
Brian Alger, Pacific Growth Equity: Good afternoon guys. One thing I'm not hearing is guidance going forward is that due to a lack of visibility or is it just a section of your prepared comments that you failed to read.
SKS: Ahhhh, (Steven laughs), I would say that lack of visibility is probably too strong of a statement. And I guess we're pretty comfortable with where the guidance is at this point in time. I mean, your numbers are the sole numbers that are out there. I think that those numbers are achievable. I think that we know what we have to do to achieve them. It doesn't require ten things happening, it requires one or two things happening. And the nature of it requiring one or two things happening is that it is somewhat of a zero or one type of situation, either they execute or they don't. It appears to be in pretty good shape today for it to execute and I think that we are comfortable with the numbers, where they are today.
24601: Here are Steven's words verbatim...
Date: August 14, 2003
Event: 2Q 03 Conference call
(bolds and underlines are mine)
"...We think the long term scope in that business is tremendous. And on a short term basis we think we can reach the point where the company gets to cash flow breakeven sometime in 2004. We fundamentally believe that the trusted computing market has got a very strong future. That there's very strong backing for it. And that the medium and long term growth potential is quite tremendous. Our task is to have as broad of penetration into that as possible. And, I think, we're really executing very well on our plan to touch as broad of share of market as we can. And I think we've been very pleased with how the market's responded to the technology.
So, the company now has access to the resources that we need in order to operate. The recent exercise of options has brought in additional cash was something that really helped to strengthen our balance sheet. We continue to work towards strengthening the overall company, and the ultimate way to do that is to drive the revenue base so this company reaches a cash flow break even position. And we think that's very achievable in 2004."
*****
At that juncture Steven did not use any modifiers with the term cash flow. Break even cash flow means break even cash flow. Nothing more, nothing less. Cash in = Cash out.
It wasn't until the SHM in either October or November, when, if I remember correctly, some other board member cautioned that break even might happen in 2005 or 2006. This was followed, within days, of Steven's explanation of what he meant by reaching breakeven. You'll note, also, that in August Steven said he expected break-even to happen "sometime" in 2004. Nowhere did he indicate that "sometime" should be interpreted as the last month of the year. If he meant that, then why didn't he say "by the end of the year"?
So, no, counselor, I have not distorted your CEO's words. He is the one who either failed miserably to say what he meant or (and I think this more likely) came back later to modify his so-called guidance.
dig space: Ya think Trippi remembers yet...
if he still holds WAVX stock? It sorta slipped his mind the last time he was asked. Probably hasn't had time to check his portfolio yet.
A bet for the Wavoid Zealots...
If eamonnshute is right and WAVX has $300,000 in Q1, 2004 revenues, I will terminate posting immediately on all boards forever!
PS to 24601: Yes, John, under all three aliases. Like I kept it a big secret who Lord Nigel was. And WaveXpounder.
zen-boy: I believe that was my point...
and, of course, an entirely worthy one, at that.
The Wavoids would prefer this question not be asked, however, as it falls in the don't-rain-on-the-parade category. Questioners are requested to restrict themselves to generic questions about the inevitability of TCG, so as to provide Steven with a seamless segue into his monologue on the logical result of TCG adoption, i.e., billions of dollars in revenue for all concerned. Including, one assumes, members of the cult.
Posted by: zen 88
In reply to: None Date:5/10/2004 5:12:29 PM
Post #of 40580
The one overarching question for the CC:
If there is an active and ongoing effort to sell an entire enterprise on the virtues of a managed Trusted Computing ecosystem, isn't their first question going to be: If this is so great, why haven't any of the big companies in the TCG implemented it?
I don't see how you could expect to sell one outside company, without a TCG company being out there first.
If there was a single thing WAVX has ever done right...
maybe there would be a teensy chance that some fool would trust them to fulfill the central role in "Trusted Computing" the zealots apparently believe they now own by default.
It ain't gonna happen. These folks are completely inept. The only thing they know how to do is gorge at the trough. It's unlikely they'll look up long enough to even see the train coming.
The reality is: WAVX is (was) a pawn...
in a struggle that one participant (MSFT) just withdrew from. The other participant (INTC) is now free to do an end run. WAVX is, in the Hamhock view, now doomed.
But, hey, I could be wrong.
Wavoids continue to self-delude...
NGSCB is announced and Wavoids cheer! The 800 lb gorilla is in our corner. This means ubiquity! This points directly at us! Hip, hip, hooray!
NGSCB is pronounced dead and Wavoids cheer! This means interoperability reigns which means ubiquity for WAVE! Hip, hip, hooray!
Is there anything the cult observes that doesn't translate into World Dominion?
Dream on....
The individual posting as Paul Czar is Snorosman.
Same style, same blather. Give him a week or two and he'll be going off on Greenspan all over again.
HhH
24601: I challenge you...
to raise the stakes on our wager to one year's posting rights, all venues. $100K in Q1, 2004 revenues being the bet.
P.S. to digspace: Cult-Monger Matt will never release you because he's on retainer. Snackman may engage in personal attacks on a daily basis, however, since he's obviously exempt from the rules here.
Who is the customer?
Absent the business use of TPMs in any of the tech firms promoting this technology, what enterprise is going to shell out the dough to be the first to try it? WAVX has for oh-so-many years now designed product primarily for specifications groups. Cyber-Comm, Finread, TCPA (now TCG). The problem is these folks aren't actually customers. The philosophy of if-you-build-it-they-will-come is, frankly, yet another one of George Gilder's techno-blatherisms.
Break-even in 2004 will be the biggest howler yet in Steven Sprague's vast catalogue of pronouncements for the Kool-Aid Krowd. If the company books even $1 million in sales in 2004 I will be amazed.
This belongs on the WAVX board...
A wavoid illustrates my main point:
(bolds mine)
Posted by: Da_Deven_Dolla
In reply to: helpfulbacteria who wrote msg# 40060 Date:5/5/2004 4:51:24 PM
Post #of 40178
CM and anybody else...
What are your personal opinions of why this could be excellent for Wave? I was always of the approach that the faster NGSCB is brought to market the faster it would force the hand of large companies to begin purchasing computers with TPM's. I work for one of the largest companies in the world and I have not seen a single sign that anybody has made a good enough argument to justify the additional capital spending that will be required to create a TC environment. I have counted on the release of NGSCB to really help paint that picture for CEO's that to run the new OS you must purchase the new hardware. Many companies such as mine are still in the frame of mind of how little can we spend on IT and still survive.This delay or scrapping of NGSCB appears to justify not having to buy a TPM PC as soon as originally thought.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks,
Steve
This belongs on the WAVX board...
A few questions:
Wave presently defines its market as the enterprise sector and, according to its CEO in an email communicated in November of 2003, expects to reach cash flow breakeven in 2004 (except, of course for all those pesky "ramp-up" costs).
1. Do any of the firms attempting to sell TPMs to this sector actually incorporate TPMs in their own operations? Does Microsoft? Does Intel? Does IBM? Does anybody?
2. If the answer to the above question is, effectively, there is nobody actually using this technology to run their business, what rational decision-maker (be it IT manager, CEO, CFO, etc., etc., etc.) will propose spending the money to be the innovator? Somebody at Ford Motor? Somebody at GE?
3. Other than connecting dots between trade exhibitions, something that has produced zilch in the way of actually predicting market penetration over, oh, eight or ten years, is there anyone even thinking about who in the hell the actual customer is going to be for these millions of dollars in sales this year?
I think the genius of Joe Trippi...
was in recognizing the power of message boards and understanding how useful they can be in molding public opinion. In WAVX's case there are at least two individuals who consistently post pro-management messages who are either presently or in the past under contract with the company. Which might be all right, if there was ever any disclosure of said relationships. When it's disclosed, however, it is always in an oblique fashion as in today's message from Weets. I believe there have been, in the past, several posters who were actually in the employ of the company, engaged in the constant spin-cycle viewed on the message boards. Is this illegal? Heck, I don't know. I ain't a lawyer. Is it even remotely ethical? I'd like to hear the argument for it. Perhaps the honorable 24601 would like to make the case!
That's three and out for me today. Thank you so much, Mr. Matt, for allowing me the opportunity to speak my mind.
Another day at IHUB...
Another round of personal attacks at the Snackman moderated WAVX board. And, surprise, surprise, Snackie himself is leading the pitchfork and torch brigade.
Do you have any shame acting as cult-monger for Snackie, Matt? I mean any at all?
Author of repeated "It's coming"...
remarks, Wavoid poster known as Weets, acknowledges less than arms-length relationship:
Posted by: weets
In reply to: Snackman who wrote msg# 39872 Date:5/4/2004 11:41:12 AM
Post #of 39881
Dear Snackman & Barry,
Take it from one who was quoted as a CEO in a TCS/Wave announcement, every word is carefully scrutinized by both sides lawyers ad nauseum!!! The Best...Carl.
*************
How many other "Wavoids" are beholden to current management? JParis? How about you, Mr. Kuhn? Any contracts with your name on them?
This question belongs on the WAVX board...
The WAVX business plan is centered on sales of TPMs to the enterprise sector.
Can any Wavoid point to a single enterprise that is actually using this technology in its business? I mean is there even one place where you could go and see it functioning in the practical world? Does Microsoft use it at any level of their organization? Does Intel? How about IBM? Hell, does WAVE itself even use it internally?
You folks think this enterprise market is composed entirely of idiots? You think CEOs and CFOs are going to okay some sort of wholesale conversion without any guinea pigs to point to? Do you even think the IT managers are dumb enough to do that? I mean, really? And yet the CEO of this company makes the statement that he expects to be at cash flow breakeven in 2004. Which, obviously, requires several millions in sales.
Is there anyone left in the cult with a functioning brain cell remaining? Or is it only the Kool-Aid-dependent that remain. And, of course, the predator group. Always the predator group.
It's bad enough that KevinS was the one...
responsible for the "outing" of Howard Golden at Raging Bull. With a very public supporting role played by Snackman himself. Here's the way they made the connection. Kevin googled "MSFT", the name "Howard", and "Los Angeles" and got an article by Howard Golden. Oh, well that's proof!
How anyone could read the idiotic rantings of the Wavoid zealots and think they might recognize a good investment just completely escapes my grasp. These people are nuts! They are completely out of touch with reality. (Aside from the usual predators, naturally.)
Matt: Riddle me this...
Why is this sort of post permissible? You know beyond the shadow of a doubt that I am not Howard Golden, and yet you allow the delusional cultists (and KevinS is the most delusional imaginable) to repeatedly attack this guy. Note, please, that Snackman does not bother to delete this stuff. Do you have a clue why? Here's a hint: It's because despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary the dimwitted board moderator still thinks the guy is me. Not that that should matter!
Anyway, here's the KevinS message:
Posted by: kevin_s5
In reply to: howard_b_golden who wrote msg# 39577 Date:4/30/2004 4:46:13 PM
Post #of 39642
howard, flattered?
stop the self-aggrandizing. A regular poster actually sent me the posts. Curious how closely they remsemble each other, don't you think?
Geez, what are the odds
1)that somebody with the same name contacts you out of the blue?;
2) that he then directs you to a message board where you've supposedly been outed?;
3) that once on the board where hhh can't post you find you have a fascination with Wave's technology (lucky you!)?;
4) that your posts would mimic hhh's writing style: causal arrogance combined with a low-grade affability for the sad and pathetic wavoids?;
5) that they're actually posted within minutes of hhh's posting on the other board?
6) That, after leaving on the same day, you both return simultaneously?
Well, what do you think? Ten percent? More? Less? I'm sure you can essplain it, of course, I could be wrong. Please don't feel compelled to respond to every post!
Besides, I think I've made my point, and unless you, hhh, and bingoman can get together for lunch, I won't be changing my mind and have nothing else to say.
By the way, yahoo looks popular in southern Califonia:
EMail Address: howard_b_golden@yahoo.com
EMail Address: HamhockHowie@yahoo.com
Yes, awk. That is my point exactly...
or one of them:
Posted by: awk
In reply to: go-kitesurf who wrote msg# 39532 Date:4/30/2004 12:09:27 PM
Post #of 39534
go-kite: SP2 and Trusted Computing
In my opinion the opportunities of Trusted Computing are still not known out there in the enterprise space. Only a select few, those that have been working together with the drivers of this technology, know about it.
As long as the entire PC industry remains in an unexplainable stealth mode nothing will happen. I find it totally irresponsible of all these players, given the tremendous need and the market readiness, that this technology is not promoted more aggressively.
******
The fact is the whole WAVX business plan hinges on the adoption of Trusted Computing by enterprises. Not the OEMs, INTEL, MSFT, etc., etc., etc., all of whom would unquestionably enjoy a new product cycle but who, despite any number of deep pockets among them, do not have the power to drive the enterprise purchase decision. The suggestion put forward by your eminent CEO last year (and I mean late last year) that the company could reach cash flow break-even (subject to his redefinition of the term) in 2004 was so pathetically self-serving that only those of you free-basing the Kool-Aid could accept it without the gag reflex kicking in.
Okay. So that's three and out for me.
P.S. to Matt: How's my favorite cult-monger today?
More WAVX factoids: Revenues up!
Well, that's if you compare 2003 to 1999. They were $187,515 in 1999, whereas 2003 produced $189,363 in revenues. Not bad for four years' progress!
Of course, the real progress is in cost containment. In 1999 the company spent $16,749,276 in g&a and selling expenses and it only spent $12,698,682 in 2003. So for every dollar in revenue the company merely shelled out $67 this past year! Quite a bit better than the $89 of 1999.
I think the fact that the company rakes in more than twice what it costs them for that Paris "office" proves what outstanding financial stewards the boys have become. Perhaps an increase in stock options is called for as a reward!
From the WAVX proxy...
Cash compensation (options excluded) to Peter Sprague, Steven Sprague, Michael Sprague for 2003: $732,500.
All-inclusive revenues for 2003: $189,363.
Sprague-pay to revenue ratio: 3.86:1
Hey, that's fair. The boys only took three bucks and eighty-six cents for every dollar in revenue the company took in last year. Add in foster son Gerry Feeney and the cash compensation is $1,198,500 and the ratio is 6.32:1.
It must be grand to own a cult.
Digspace: Did you read Doma-kopf's report...
on Steven's speech to the European Union? It was quite fascinating. Apparently it took place in Paris this morning. Steven's French is, as you know, impeccable. I guess he hit a grand slam with the security crowd. Donald Rumsveld himself was overheard musing about the possibility of installing TPMs in the Humvees to prevent terrorists from hot-wiring them. That would, of course, mean millions in place by the end of this year. And that's just the Pentagon's business! I don't know how it went over in terms of the stock price, having removed WAVX from my quicken page, but it's probably sky-rocketing again! I'll probably have to eat some crow in the morning. Anyway, cheers.
dig space: Weby is studying modern ethics now...
and apparently he dresses up like the Dalai Lama while navel-gazing. Sounds kinda quirky to me, but to each their own.
Ciao!
P.S. to Matt: I'm changing your title to Cult-Monger. Has a more barbarian ring to it than Cult-Facilitator, don't you think? Anyway, have a nice day. Don't forget the big sale at Mervyn's this weekend!
Matt, old boy, you ever reflect...
on the irony of your policies here? You have a number of posters who get incarcerated merely for arguing with people--some completely civilly--and yet you actually encourage homophobic slurs that some days reach an almost hysterical pitch. Do you ever think about that, Matt?
Homophobic slurs are encouraged here!
Somewhat remarkable, given this age of political correctness. Those who indulge in the most egregious abuses are the same people who like to use the n-word and other racial/religious slurs--in the right company, of course. They won't do it here, because it's a little too revealing for comfort.
Now, of course, there will be a hundred new iterations of the same bend-over jokes that junior high schoolers have been reveling in for the past 100 years.
What's the latest possible moment...
for WAVX to release details on 2003 compensation? Whatever it is, my guess is the actual release will predate the deadline by a good ten minutes.
My sense is that excessive greed at WAVX extends well beyond the obvious targets: Sprague, Sprague & Feeney. The latest 10K reveals that in 2003 1,340,739 shares of WAVX were sold in connection with options exercises. Based on the filings to date, only 160,000 of those shares are accounted for--150,000 from the Steven Sprague exercise and sale, 10,000 from Nolan Bushnell. (Peter's sale of 500,000 shares appears to have come from his existing holdings as do Feeney's 100,000 shares.) Which leaves 1,180,739 unaccounted for (publicly). I suspect, frankly, that options were exercised by several individuals within the management team and--I'm willing to bet--almost simultaneously unloaded in the August spike. Not that we'll ever know.
P.S. to Matt: How's my favorite cult-facilitator?
24601: Ever get an answer...
on the issue of whether WAVE "set up" a message board as per the George Gilder quote? Perhaps he misspoke. Or perhaps not. Whether they actually set it up or not (via their henchman Snackman), I'd be willing to bet they allowed their employees to post on the RB site. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to learn someone was actually assigned the task of monitoring it and, yes, steering the discussion in pro-WAVX directions. I would look at MrKleen for starters. And, of course, that person whose name was mentioned by CPA. I think it's possible such behavior was, in fact, rampant at Lee, MA. If so, it would be the hundredth example of idiocy in the boardroom.
P.S. I think the independent contractors who are beholden to present management and who keep mouthing things like, "It's coming" ought to disclose the fact that they receive compensation from the firm. It's my feeling that not disclosing this information is misleading to the reader and, I don't know, not exactly kosher. But, then, you're the lawyer.
aae: Actually, it's quite comfortable here...
the food is excellent--three squares a day. And every evening we gather for Kumbaya-time. Perhaps you would like to join us? Merely annoy a stock-board monitor and he will have Matt place you here for the duration. Strictly business, of course. Nothing personal. Anyway, nice of you to ask.
Actually, I think management greed...
at WAVX extends beyond the obvious targets: Sprague, Sprague & Feeney. The latest 10K reveals that in 2003 1,340,739 shares of WAVX were sold in connection with options exercises. Based on the filings to date, only 160,000 of those shares are accounted for--150,000 from the Steven Sprague exercise and sale, 10,000 from Nolan Bushnell. (Peter's sale of 500,000 shares appears to have come from his existing holdings as do Feeney's 100,000 shares.) Which leaves 1,180,739 unaccounted for (publicly). I suspect, frankly, that options were exercised by several individuals within the management team and--I'm willing to bet--almost simultaneously unloaded in the August spike. Not that we'll ever know.
P.S. to Matt: The folks in Lee, MA should include you in the bonus pool!
24601: I agree completely...
with your remarks here:
"People who declare that Wave's managers are dishonest, but who go on to say that if Wave succeeds they will admit being wrong about that, should re-sort their thinking, segregating their subjective feelings from their objective observations and rethinking things more analytically. It makes little sense to pronounce judgment on an input measure like managerial integrity but promise to reverse it on the basis of an output measure like commercial success. By that formula many of the greatest scoundrels of all time would be vindicated. If their problem is with the technology or the business model, fine. If their problem is with the integrity of management, fine. But they shouldn't be heard to use one as a foil for the other so that they can flip sides after things work out."
It's my feeling that WAVX management is a hideously greedy group that plays fast and loose with the truth and that would stab the shareholders in the back in a heartbeat if it put a buck in their wallets. No amount of commercial success will change that. They may turn out to be successful pigs, but that will not change their piggishness an iota. My guess is they are every bit as inept as they are greedy. But who knows? Maybe I'll be wrong on that point.