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.
Gowave1
There are obviously sufficient shares that investors want to sell directly or short. Prior financing, upcoming financing who knows. The psychology of this stock has to change and that is either tied to explicit revenue numbers or a PR which is truly unequivocal in terms of earnings potential.
Dory
A reverse split could increase the stock price above the $1 threshhold although I am not convinced that the listing rules are absolute and thus there might be other potential ways to fail to meet the guidelines. But >$1 can be achieved this way. That said, it is probably very rare when a compnay does this and finds itself with a higher market cap one year later. At least the ones I've seen have continued to sink.
The short term share price is almost entirely relevant to financing and little else. Going off the main Nasdaq exchange would seem to be detrimental but not necessarily fatal to those efforts. But as I've said for over a year now, Wave is at risk of not growing revenue fast enough to offset their increasing dilution factor.
It continues to be a horse race.
weby
I saw that and was quite suprised since previously I thought the info said that there would be a variety of Vista systems including media center. Now it seems like the media center functionality will be built into the OS as standard and one would assume a strong integration with Intel and AMD media designs (Live and Viiv).
As for wave, this would certainly be a timely spot for their mythical partnmership with Microsoft to become real. The corporate tests are supposed to address useability and management; something you would think Wave's products are especially designed to do. If not Wave then ?
may1sep2
The opportunity and the rational couldn't be made any clearer than in your summary. It is quite reasonable to be concerned about the timing of any sales given wave's situation; it is really blinders to think the PR was just non actionable fluff and driven by desperation.
Vader
I don't know if I've ever heard Wave sound negative about any products, services or collaborations that others are taking with regard to trusted computing. My guess is that this is the programmed response whether it is truly helpful or competitive to Wave.
OT Micro
Yes it did get cancelled for unknown reasons.. I had further dialogue and then sent an email to several account people raising the driver issue and software support. I hadn't gotten a response for two days but got a call from Gateway a few minutes ago that I couldn't take. So we'll see.
Micro
From a marketing/sales position, if they could build a 1.2 TPM into their controller, then it makes sense to publicize and sell it. Who knows what Infineon said about software support or whether Broadcom was trying to go another route. From gateway's perspective, it means the machine is ready and I assume anyone can get the drivers and support software when they are ready. Likely someone didn't meet expectations.
From what I know, gateway expected to be selling support software in Q4 and there have been repeated delays. certainly if you can't use the TPM, that would be an obstacle.
doma
I've gone through weird interactions with Gateway about my computer including having them cancel my order, not tell me or the salesperson and then not being able to explain why. But with all the back and forth about the TPMs, it doesn't feel like the drivers are available. The best I heard was that the TPM works with Computrace if my computer is stolen. Soemwhat unlikely for a desktop. It is strange however that Broadcom would supply a 1.2 compliant TPM, but not what is necessary to use it. Shows how unused TPMs are to have taht strategy.
Doma
I'm not sure how to reconcile Barge's link for the GBO board without suffixes which says TPM and your GBO link with suffixes that says no TPM. Seems like the GBO comes in many configurations or just conflicting information. But the GBO is not listed as the Viiv MB.
Barge
Is the Intel 945GBO MB you linked to the same as the 945 MBs in the Viiv spec?
Intel® Desktop Boards D945PSN, D945PLM, D945PVS, D945PAW, D945GNT, D945GTP, and D945GCZ
It's hard for me to read these and just conclude the 945GBO are the same?
Barge
I tried to follow the links for the Viiv MBs and the link you supplied with the Intel MB TPM spec. There were a couple of 945 MB descriptors for Viiv but those weren't shown on the intel descriptions. There are a number of 945 boards - some with TPM and some without, The Viiv ones have new descriptors with no details. At least this is what I found.
oT Micro
What's interesting is that the Gateway I ordered (but still don't have) came out in the end at $1400. It has a better CPU (dual core), a $200 3 year next business day support, 2 mg of memory but not office 2003. The other features are the same. That works out pretty close to the computer that you assembled. It has an Intel 945G board which I assume is slightly different and uses the integrated TPM from Broadcom.
It seems to show how commoditized this has become as the costs are similar whether you build it yourself or buy it.
Dory
I think that Wave has participated on more than one team in a bidding situation and that they spent considerable time meeting with folks in the government over the years so that the specifications include the right criteria for trusted computing. It is probably too strong to think that Wave was "specified" but not too strong to believe that they were sought out by different teams because their products met the RFP requirements so well.
mymoney
As I said, there was an incredible short term run up when it was in triple digits. Not when it was $2.
scorpio
Qualcom was just about the only hi tech investment I had that I got right early on and actually sold for great gains but before it exploded upward due to insanity and a short squeeze. I purchased it in single digits but have zero memory of any $60 day increase while it was lowly priced. Not even close. There may have been gains of that size when it was in three digits (there was an absurd run up due to a short squeeze later on) but there was no gain from $2 to over $60 in a day. Or my mind is so dulled that I've forgotten something that would have netted me close to a million dollars in one day. Only Wave did that following the AMD announcement, short lived however.
theguv
My best guess is that Wave and Gateway were well along the path of some form of bundling deal (terms unknown) and then Gateway's plans were deferred by months possibly because the dirvers for their TPM 1.2 were not available. And still may not be available. Gateway has not provided any details on how they intend to support their TPMs (which in their specs appear on a few machines and are noted as delivered through Broadcom's integrated network device. Wave at this stage does not support that TPM at least they are not saying so publically. I wouldn't say it's a deadend at all but a done deal would seem premature at this point. To the extent that HP is also using this device, I would still be concerned that Infineon won't provide a solution.
Dhamster
Seems to me that there are plausible scenarios supporting failure, slow progress and huge growth and I would be comfortable arguing any one of them. It is so entirely dependent on the rate of trusted computing adoption and how Wave executes - both seemingly difficult to predict with any confidence.
Right now Wave lacks a certain degree of credibility in terms of results. And market adoption and usage is obviously pretty minimal so far. So the price hardly represents anything. But with a different psychology (good or bad), it could certainly move materially.
scorpio
They are so divided by compartments that it is almost a different company. I suppose it makes them more efficient in terms of sales and manufacturing at the expense of some customer experiences (that seek more flexibility).
cliffdweller
I suspect by the time I'm through, we'll know what is available or not. I don't really understand how they will sell me a machine with a TPM, but then explain to me that it cannot be turned on and used. Did they explicitly tell you that the drivers are missing and will be available later or is that an assumption (which by the way I have heard from other circles). Beyond that I am also in contact with Wave to understand whether ETS will work with said TPM. Given all this mystery, it is clear why we have sold little to nothing to date.
micro
I got the double layer DVD burner. That was one thing you couldn't get on the Optiplex.
awk
Armed with this information, I should have no trouble working this out. I left the rep a message.
I must sya thie business/consumer distinctions are a real hurdle. I t makes little sense if thes emachines are build to order, why you can't mix and match. I couldn't even get the media center on anything that is for business although Gateway is offering XP Pro at no extra cost.
Awk
^Thanks Should have found that myself. Perhaps since Broadcom licensed Infineon's TSS, the writeup referred to Infineon. Or it shows that Gateway doesn't have their act together. Either way, I am assuming that it is a real 1.2 (not a 1.1 called a 1.2) and that Wave's software will work with it. Otherwise it will go back. But overall it seems like a very strong computer and better priced with features than Dell's choice.
Doma
That's what they said to me. The salesperson spoke to a technical person who then read off some standard language I had heard about Infineon and the fact they had the only end to end hardware and software trusted computing solution. Last year I heard that some of their machines had been shipped without the drivers and I saw their comments about waiting for drivers. This whole TPM thing is still a mystery.
Did you think they used Broadcom?
Dell/gateway
Well this was an interesting experience. The Optiplex is not very configurable in terms of firewire, video cards, audio cards and DVD burners. So you can get the TPM but not lots of other things. I'm checking to see if TPMs can be included in other models like the XPS series. The distinctions between business, home office etc. are real barriers to navigate so I am not surprised at all about the issues we've seen about the web sites and different businees units.
Gateway told me their E-6500D SB has an infineon 1.2 TPM in it. It had lots of options and the salesperson was negotiable on price. I have no guarantee that ETS will work and the drivers will all be present but there is a 30 day return policy so I will see what happens.
Any Gateway experiences to report?
Gateway E6500 D
This desktop computer says that it contains a 1.2 TPM. Is this the one that shipped without the drivers? I will call Gateway to see if they have a better handle on this feature now but I wondered how far we got with them last month. The last Gateway notes I saw indicated that they were waiting for "drivers" and were still getting their new securioty suite together. It seems absurd to want to buy their computer with TPM and you can't really do it.
Another question - how does one compare HT technology with the dual core chips from Intel? They both sound like they can process more than one thing at a time but I don't know how to pick one versus the other assuming the roughly the same cost for similar processing speeds?
Seeking 1.2 TPM in a desk top
My computer is fried. When I go to Dell, it seems that the Optiplexes are only being sold as refurbished and are not current models. None of the new desktops have a TPM (correct?). When I go to Gateway, all I can see is TPMs associated with laptops but little information even with that. Gateway seems on a long hold. It would be ironic that I will buy a new desk top without a TPM but can anyone point to machines that have a 1.2 for purchase now.
Mbarr
Each of those questions have self evident answers. There wasn't anything to announce until now or they would have. And the price went down because there is a large overhang from the financing. As for April 2006, that's months away and I'm sure you expect numerous nonsense contract announcements during this period. Whom do you think they'll make up as it will have to be real good to trick everybody?
willem
If the recent financing results in the sale of over 5 million shares, we're going to see downward pressure. The previous 2 million share day and this one have reduced that pressure. Simple as that.
I think you'll find that many contract PRs are non specific as to terms, revenue etc. And I've seen numerous gov't awards worded just like this. And as a subcontractor, details are even less eposed to public scrutiny. While I can appreciate some of your frustration (who isn't frustrated), I do think you need to view other stocks and announcements to evaluate these PRs reasonably.
Mark1
Since this partner came from left field, it certainly appears that they sought Wave out. Maybe wave was part of other teams and thus their capabilites were known and NCI sought them after winning. Envision implies to me that they haven't settled all the terms but they do have some measured understanding of what is expected of Wave. Wave might have deferred the financing if this was in the bag; I beleive this as well as other items simply weren't certain (at least to timing) so they had to pull the trigger without supportive news.
We all know that trusted computing is happening but we don't know how successful wave will be in this paradigm shift. Every instance of a contract is a good thing. If its in a highly visible setting the better. The government was expected to be the first adopters and we got what we hoped for.
mig/others
It seems the importance of today's news is being lost because of their recent financing activities lead to heavy selling. We are seeing more financial journals mentioning Wave as a trusted computing play. What Wave lacks is the credibility in terms of successful deals. As you know they have worked with numerous system integrators and spent a lot of time talking within the government with little to show other than the previous military academy pilot. This contract is a sign of success and demonstrates that their products can and will play a role in the trusted government space. It certainly will have some economic value over the years but also will likely have little impact in terms of their short term financing needs.
But after hearing about IBM Global Services and HP and Northrup and Computer Associates and Maximus and EDS for years, I'm pleased that this Army contract opportunity actually panned out. The fact it's a sub contract with someone whom I believe was never mentioned is also an interesting footnote.
SL
Is the inference that they had not developed their own TSS which satisfied the 1.2 specs and rather than build their ownm they went with NTRU but everything else is status quo. And if they are not using Wave's CSP (with its special hooks etc.) there is no change in Wave's ability to work with the TPM than before.
barge
Right now I don't know if anything is being downloaded to the Apple computer which would be considered valuable. All I know is that they don't want people to put the OS on another computer and so maybe all the checking is just done on the computer itself. After all I could just want to use it for client based applications and Web browsing.
So far as I understand it, valuable video content will be streamed and never stored on the computer. While someone still may be able to copy it, it would not be the original digital stream. Come to think of it, how does the IPOD work to capture semi valuable content and still not have a TPM and Wave involved.
But I can reconcile no ETS on the client PC machine with a server application that checks the Infineon TPM. That would still mean Wave's ETS doesn't run on Apple's PC OS.
Barge/Nick
When I think of wave's current EAP, I think of an enterprise managing keys for all their machines under policies that they can specify. If all that was happening was a check on whether the machine was an apporved machine to run the Apple OS, then I would see other approaches. First surely there may be a way for the TPM and OS to interact on the client side or the server just check that state but manage nothing. If the latter, I would expect Infineon or Apple could do this. If Apples trusted content was managed in a proprietary way through streaming and limited use on devices, maybe the TPM is not needed for this at all. Thus I can see a solution and a service which could come out in January with out wave.
Barge et als.
I've thought about how to provide perspective to a number of these threaded discussions.
It seems to me that there are some people like me who reach some conclusions based on the accumulated discussions with Wave about a variety of subjects. There are others, like you, who have developed a certain construct about how companies should go about delivering trusted content and then extrapolate that Wave must be involved since they offer the best solution. Both have merits and weakenesses.
That typified the Xbox debate and now seems to touch on the Apple/Intel debate. There are certainly good arguements to support Wave being part of this product launch now or later on. For me though, I can't get through the discussions I've had which really indicated that neither Linux or Apple OS are supported by ETS and that given Wave's very limited and stretched resources, that neither are likely to be addressed any time soon. They are really having enough difficulty keeping up with Dell's requirements.
The IPOD seems to have provided music security without Wave or TPMs. The discussions about Apple and video talk about streaming and new comprehension codecs to address security concerns from content providers. So far the TPM in the box seems designed to keep Apple OS on Apple boxes and not for a new form to trusted content distribution.
Now I know Wave would never explicitly say we are in something unless they could but I'm also skeptical they would deliberately mislead either. So I am in the camp that we don't work in the Apple OS but could if Apple develops a business model that utilizes TPMs and comes to Wave to see if they can work with them engineeering an elegant solution.
Just my opinion,
Snackman
It is not unreasonable to have discussions about management's execution of the business plan. There have been strong points and weak points. The board serves a place for those to share points of view. As you know they surely can't discuss these matters with spouses - we've had enough divorces.
D&O good response OEM
Doma
Given Apple's propensity for proprietary solutions, interoperability probably produces a rash for them. (tough sentence to say or spell). Thus Infineon is a reasonable choice.
That said, I think some are underestimating Infineon. SKS is known to shoot from the hip when it comes to competitors. While Infineon may indeed only be focusing on supporting their products and those they license, I would not be astonished to see something addressing other TPMs.
That's why I wnat to see all those supposed pending OEMs become contracts.
Kant
It's likely the author would have contacted Wave during the process but the article has been forwarded in any event.
Orda
There is always the "agent" effect. This approach is easy for management and preserves their control. While it also dilutes their ownership, they can get that back by additional low priced options. All other options introduce risk to them (and to us). So yes while it seems logical and less costly to take out a 5 million dollar loan (assuminfg Wave could actually get it), I doubt if they will ever go in that direction.
LFAWG
It should not have been a surprise. However there could have been expectations that additional follow up from other OEMs or elsewhere could have improved the share price prior to closing the deal. I don't think Wave is particularly good at really exploring the finance options although I could believe that most others would have reduced the control of management and that they didn't follow those options. The current path is easy for them almost commoditized.