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.
Barge
If you keep giving away the secret of the Embassy tool bar, there will be no Kaboom. Everybody will just say that is old news. Keep quiet for gods sake. You don't see me spilling all the secrets.
vader
The latter. The decisions have been made. When they are ready to sell, we'll have our answers in the public domain.
VC
Suggests that Dell has sold to more than a couple of Wavoids.
More than 15 million "trusted clients" have been shipped by PC makers such as Hewlett-Packard and Dell, according to the TCG.
And presumably IBM doesn't make up 99.9% of the total.
mbarr
Maybe but not necessarily for a long time. It just may give more room for more information to be provided about partners and progress. I still think it will be tough to go into a conference call and release information with cash accounts barely making payroll. I would consider it to be an unbelievable upside surprise if revenues were now supporting the company. Of course the outstanding warrants introduce an interesting variable.
Kev
I didn't say that. I don't beleive the bottleneck to their success is their credibiltiy. I don't know if there is a bottleneck in fact beyond the time it takes for the market to fully engage trusted computing. My only point is that if the success is happening then we should see evidence of that in revenues and if there are no revenues its difficult to support the notion there is success.
I beleive our stuff works and that value is added to the customers who are using it. But the number of customers must still be small or our revenue per customer must be small.
Barge
This isn't directly about share price. The share price will move up if Wave is successful and know I don't think Wave's role is well unerstood. But I also can beleive that we don't know for sure all the details and its value either. My main point is that the success (if it is real) must be manifested by revenue at some point. As long as revenue isn't there, you can not be sure the success is the way it is painted. And it is deferred well beyond expectations, a serious price will be paid by shareholders. Enough said.
Barge
You are missing or refuse to see the point. Wave has and continues to announce deals and with it progress at that level. They may have the technology to be what you say they will be. But there is a point where that hypothesis needs to tested in a tangible way. Are you just going to believe them when they say they are ubiquitous and revenue is $50,000. That translates to nonsense or a very low per unit sale price. Either way unacceptable except to academics.
Kiss
This is a good example of why Wave is so enigmatic. On the surface here are two companies announcing a deal that doesn't have apparent obstacles. I assume it never happened because the technology never got fully developed and/or at a reasonable price point. At the same time, the dot.com disaster was occurring so maybe Kiss couldn't deal with it (either). But I do think these PRs are good examples of why some people question anything wave announces. But importantly it also blinds them into assuming every announcement will produce the same result -- something that plausibly won't happen with the likes of Intel, dell , Seagate, STM. But it underscores the necessity of declaring revenue and profits - its our only yardstick to show this time it is different.
mortgages
one issue often raised is whether Wave uses its own products in its business. Well here it is. It also can serve as a good case example since they can use it to integrate TPMs and other services into the business.
And who knows - mortgage brokers earn more than Wave has so far. And sign online can be self sufficient.
zen
Just when you thought you could understand the company? Perhaps the same person who linked SKS' story to another Wave Systems worked on this as well?
CSLEWIS
These are normally purchased through payroll deduction and funded with Treasury shares. The price is determined at the end of the purchasing period so it feels like the cash withteld might be a deferred liability until it is used to buy the stock. That may mean that is is technically available to be used for other expenses but I do not believe we are talking about any meaningful deferral. My guess is that the end of funds day was an approximate number into July but possibly very early August remebering that all bills can be deferred and that with the shelf available and a plan in place, they just feel they can wait till the last minute, possibly extended by cash receipts and also awaiting some news.
1stflight
Also I don't think Wavexpress would be worth much now given it's all perceived value based on a number of assumptions coming true. No way would it be sold off at this juncture.
Zen
I take that as given.
OKNPV
I've not heard a thing that would suggest no need to finance. All I can infer is that the lack of trading transaltes to no offering yet to investors. The longer that goes on, the price will edge up. I also anticipate some PRs prior to the placement if at all possible. Given the distinct possibility that other entities have licensed or bundled Wave's software, i tis logical to think we'll hear about that before the trigger is pulled. If they have recieved some cash (current or deferred revenue) then that could provide extra weeks which is really where we are or are approaching now.
I just don't think it is timely to start thinking there are millions of dollars taken in. But in this case, I wouldn't mind be completely wrong again.
OKNPV
I remain unconvinced that they don't need to refinance as before and can almost believe the lengthening of the timing is encouraging the share price to creep up.
That said I am also accepting the hypothesis that business and business opportunities are coming their way because TPMs are appearing all over the place and so far Wave has the goods to manage them in various applications and with whomever TPMs you use. And their known client list is unusually good for a penny stock.
I will remain concerned and conservative while expenses well exceed revenues. Once that picture (or a clear line of sight) emerges, it truly will be different.
DOMA
Who does Gateway use for their TPM equipped machines? Last I saw, they were starting to offer TPM machines (somewhat obscurely) but had not identified the TPM provider.
2bs
Think outside of the box. Think of the first trusted computer (secure applications) created by the new company Intel/Apple and their first killer application is the secure downloading of first run movies. Turns out Apples' OS was designed well enough to support secure applications - something Microosft couldn't achieve. Also through Intel's virtualization support(although my knowledgeable friend thinks AMD's is a lot better) people who want to run their old untrusted applications can continue to run Windows. So don't you think they could turn the industry updside down?
KEV WRONG
These are issues to address but hardly one I think is questionable. But then again you haven't been able to prioritize your concerns -- everything is an issue that Wave can't meet with you.
CS
I've been wondering about the Seagate trusted drive. Does the description below describe the trusted drive without any reference to a TPM. Using a TPM will further protect the keys but it is not necessary. Wave's colaboration with Seagate enabled it to work in a TPM world. Perhaps Utimaco's key management software will let it operate in a non TPM networked world.
Do you (others) agree?
ramsey2
Your summary is consistent with my understanding. The other variation would be if someone like HP licensed something from Wave and integrated into their HP Protect Tools suite.
By the way the Hutton summary talks about different TPM vendors with deals with Wave and mentions Atmel. To the best of my knowledge, we do not have any revenue related contract with Atmel, even a small one.
Foam
In the past, I've heard sentiment that the TPM deployment projections were likely too high in 2005 and maybe too low in 06. Recently I sense that sentiment has changed and that the 05 projections could even be low. In the cc, SKS indicated that all the major OEMs have made their plans for deployment and that second and third tier companies are in the planning stages, no doubt considering the market landscape. It is indeed encouraging that the TPM is starting to appear all over in the PC world and we have now seen, in writing, a blueprint for mobile phone security in a similar fashion. There's still a lot of things for Wave to address but at least the most critical (will there be a market to serve in a big way) is being answered in an affirmative manner.
CS
There are two things to consider. First it is a new product in a new market and thus it is a way to announce it is real and being sold. The ultimate size of th emarket and how it ties to other related areas (note their DVR products) may make TPMs more important than their current state.
Also I would not discount the possiblity that Wave, a better partner with them than it may appear on the surface, encouraged them to do this as a means of showing that their IP and the trusted computing market is starting. Indeed at this early stage, sales of trusted computing are so small relative to all the giants, that any PR is positioning for broader things and brand image. If it was tied to materiality, no one would ever hear of it for some time.
Racer
The clear answer is that Dell is gradually incorporating TPMs and support stuff whereas the other items have been around for a real long time. Back in December, we had Envoy. Then some dell with Broadcom and now STM. Dell hasn't even yet started advertising and emphasizing trusted computing. These will all come along.
Next year assuming we are all still here, I will be very discouraged and probably gone if Dell has not expanded its trusted computing offerings, its marketing and furthered its work with wave.
Barge
I am unsure of just what using Wave's CSP does in terms of a lock in. I knowe Wave will be paid if any product or service is commercialized but future lockins are another thing. I am trying to find the answer out myself.
Dell
The latest set of Dell ads to small businesses still don't mention much about security except for spyware/anti virus. So one important guage of TPM awareness and marketing will be when Dell believes such mention will provide them with a competitive advantage. That just may come in time and it seems there are sufficient benefits today that they could package a good set of reasons now.
I do think that all of these decisions are made carefully and well in advance. Also each vertical industry segment in Dell makes their own decisions. Thus I personally believe it is a matter of time; unfortunately time is one of the most valuable and scarce resources for Wave.
OT for those following this type of issue
Illegal Naked Short Selling Update with Wes Christian and Sean Greenwood on 'Corporate Strategies with Tim Connolly' Sunday, July 10th 9 p.m.
Friday July 8, 6:00 am ET
HOUSTON, July 8, 2005 (PRIMEZONE) -- A special two-hour, live call in report on Illegal Naked Short Selling with attorneys Wes Christian and Sean Greenwood will air Sunday night, July 10 at 9 p.m. EDT. John O'Quinn's lead litigator on illegal naked short selling, Wes Christian, will disclose the latest winning decisions in court and the SEC and will discuss what he believes is a trillion dollar damage scenario for common shareholders. Listeners may call in questions live and toll free to Wes, Sean and Tim Connolly at 1-866-606-TALK (8255). Recent guests of the show have included Enterprise Products CEO Dan Duncan, Celgene's CEO John Jackson, Landry's CEO Tilman Fertitta, Changewave Research's Tobin Smith, Mario Gabelli, former SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt, former Compaq CEO Eckard Pfeiffer, Money Manager Louis Navellier, and many others. The Business Talk Radio Show may be heard on KSEV AM 700 in Houston, 740 AM WSBR in Boca Raton, Florida and on over 375 affiliate stations nationwide listed at CRN1 http://www.cableradionetwork.com, or on the Internet at http://www.businesstalkradio.net. This hour of ``Corporate Strategies with Tim Connolly'' is hosted by Tim Connolly of Corporate Strategies Merchant Bankers (http://www.corporate-strategies.net). Noted Economist Mike King of Princeton Research provides live technical analysis for the show.
ADVERTISEMENT
About Wes Christian
Wes received his Bachelor of Science degree from West Texas State University in 1975 (now West Texas A&M University) and his Doctor of Jurisprudence from South Texas College of Law in 1978. In addition to the Texas State Bar, Wes is also admitted to practice before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, United States Tax Court, United States Court of Claims, United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, and the United States District Court for the Western District of Colorado. Wes' practice from 1978 to 1993 was principally concentrated in real estate and business organizations. Since this time, he has devoted a considerable percentage of his practice time to commercial litigation, including a number of hundred million dollar cases. Wes has served and is presently serving as a board member of several privately held and public corporations across the country. Wes is a member of the Houston Bar Association, the State Bar of Texas, the American Trial Lawyers, and the American Bar Association.
About Corporate Strategies, Inc.
Corporate Strategies, Inc. (http://www.corporate-strategies.net) is a Merchant Bank in the traditional European sense of the word. As the term has evolved from the 18th Century to today, Merchant Banking describes an enterprise that not only finances a company's product or service, but also assists in developing a comprehensive business strategy. Corporate Strategies is comprised of seasoned executives with extensive experience in merchant banking, including business development and strategy, public and private company corporate finance, capital markets research, human resources, due diligence and transaction negotiation and execution.
Corporate Strategies with Tim Connolly
``Corporate Strategies with Tim Connolly'' is live talk radio...with the Titans of Business who move financial markets! The show is hosted by Tim Connolly, CEO of Merchant Banker Corporate Strategies, Inc. The Executive Producer of the show is broadcast news veteran Jan Carson, an award winning journalist with more than 20 years experience as a top-rated television news anchor and reporter for NBC, ABC and CBS network affiliates. ``Corporate Strategies with Tim Connolly'' features financial experts from across the nation providing the latest intelligence on equities, income investments, and a variety of risk, equity and option strategies.
Contact:
Corporate Strategies, Inc.
Darla Blaha
(713) 621-2737
news@corporate-strategies.net
CSJ Law
Wes Christian
jwc@csj-law.com
Sean Greenwood
sgreenwood@csj-law.com
(713) 659-7617
Bull
I'd ask you one question which you appear to imply by yours: Is it clear that Wave needs permission to use the logo on their site as they did in the context of what they did? If it is clear that they needed to do that, then your question is a reasonable one assuming that you are following everything the company does and want to make sure that they never do something incorrect whether intended or not.
If for one don't consider this issue worthy of concern or discussion but that's just me.
The majority of the Yahoo crowd has one primary agenda which is to try to make an issue out of everything Wave ever does and turn anything positive into a negative.
gofigure
I don't think the Spagues or anyone else in management or the board could or would do this. The scenario would be an inability to get funds on any rational basis and an outside deal that would turn the company private with a premium, albeit way too little, for the public shareholders. Yes management could participate in the future success of the company but on very different terms (eg strict pay for performance) and certainly less control than today. Again I don't think this is probable but plausible if they can't generate investor interest by closing and announcing deals or being much more affirmative about future revenue instead of the wishy washy stuff. The latter just reinforces the uncertainty of everything.
Drmyke3
I started to look at Neom only a couple of months ago. From what I can tell, its price has increased dramatically in recent times and I suspect the profiles in the investment newsletter stimulated a lot of the speculative buying. Even reading comments here, lots of people like the Neom story but seem on edge because news isn't coming out quickly or regualarly and/or the price just doesn't keep rising. If that's indicative of the base support, then the previous price increase could deflate somewhat until other more reinforcing news is made public. Also in the absence of news, it will be difficult to attract new investors. All of this operates outside of whatever real progress the company is making. That's the way it is with development stage companies.
gofigure
If you want to worry, consider the decision to go private because the PP after next is not tenable. The way the next one would be viable is if revenue expectations are solid and that takes some solid data.
Pennyheaven
You can't seriously believe there are people here that know non public material information and are silly enough to indicate so on a public message board. By now you should realize that some folks do good due diligence about the market opportunities and inform board members but aren't posting here about future events. If you are investing based on hype and clairvoyant messages, I suggest you reconsider.
Zen
Or they just didn't strike a deal yet? The forecasts of cash are not precise so it is impossible to predict with certainty a funding date and also impossible to predict how cash revenues will push the date out somewhat. I'm pretty certain they will need money but they don't appear to have a sense of urgency about it. But they have also taken things down to the wire before which never seems rational.
Martmac
Looks like a clean, straight forward and important deal. I'd love to see any indication of the revenue model and deployment timing for this or anything else related to their technology licensing.
CMF
Just looking at your links shows everything missing (not just unfavorable information unless you treat the entire pR as "unfavorable". Have no idea why but one possibility is some problem with the server/database instead of active removal of content. I think you are inventing issues or motives - it's not as if a deliberate removal, removes anything.
Zen
The explanation provided was that Intel Capital did not usually, if at all, invest in small public companies where such investment would effectively have a huge price impact. Private companies sure they invest in them. Wave tried to make it happen a little while back. If this was not the whole story, I would suggest the possibility that the terms such as a major investment was not something management wanted to do. But the first scenario makes sense until people can identify a few small public companies funded by Intel capital.
wave
I think the lack of volume says no deal is in place. But they will need some hefty sales in big volumes to achieve the numbers you suggest. I'm more inclined to believe the sales cycle and pipeline are becoming solid and that there is some future visibility but that volume sales are still several months away.
But my opinion is just that and I could be misjudging things (once again).
waverider
Your goalposts are wide and the answer is somewhere in between. They'll need more money and there were some sales. I do think we'll see some clear dots in writing before we are floored by a major revenue surprise on the upside.(We've already been floored by the downside last quarter).
kihei
I think it's impossible to predict how strongly any company can enforce its patents until it happens. Now NEOM obviously is willing to go to court to enforce them and at least in the virgin instance reach some settlement. Not knowing the terms leaves a lot to speculate on. In general most companies prefer to enter into agreements unless they hope to own the entire space. Litigation is usually not the preferred mode unless that is what the company was created to do - buy IP and litigate instead of create and sell.
One thing I noted about NEOM and asked about (no replies) is why a company like Doo Coo Mo could provide a bar code service in Japan and my guess was NEOM's patents must not be enforceable in Japan.
kihei
My company often licenses some IP from another party and that agreement stipulates the terms of the licensing. If a third party did a deal with us, their ability to utilize that same IP that was licensed by us could be constrained. It all depends on the circumstances on how it would be used. That would be the case even if we were acquired since the licensing deals are not always transferable to new parties.
I don't know enough about the agreements you allude to but it easy to infer that an agreemnt for one party to use some patented technology for a certain fee would not allow a much bigger party to utilize it on a grander scale or in a different configuration or delivery mechanism without additional compensation or agreements.
Sheldon
I didn't say it was old news. In fact I asked you. The promise of adapting ETS for HP was something I heard way back but up till now hadn't occurred. So anything suggesting otherwise is of interest.