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.
yup, there is no question that segment reporting fails to indicate magical souren smithing ... which might not feel good. the feel good stuff is in this, from PR for the annual report:
In March, a European governmental agency selected EMBASSY Remote Administration Server (ERAS) software for the management of PC-based Trusted Platform Modules (TPM). An initial order was executed for approximately 6,000 seat licenses plus professional services support.
This is not the recent NHS thingy, the NHS thingy was Safend, this as reported is not Safend.
To me, 6k seats as indicated is $300k ... roughly speaking. This showed up and weighs in (speculatively) like PwC did. PwC began and ended there. So too may this. But that is the beginning and end of feel good for me. THe NHS thingy, particularly noting that it is SFND products, which seriously, they get something like $10 a seat for with COS likely through the roof ... well, the available ratio of whine and moan to feel good is less than whole hog bullish.
Nevertheless, the SFND deal with the NHS is announced, a 1000 seats at 10 bucks a seat is my guess. The other thingy, 6000 seats is more likely in the 50 a seat, for about 300k. It seems one can feel fgood about notions for chips and bits going forwards on both of these (but seriously, I think SFND sales are not profitable, something about them smacks of lots of customization for 10 bucks a seat in the end ... as SKS put it, selling a "commodity". Commodity sales enjoy razor thin margins. Not feel good stuff.
So who cares if it is 1m seats of NHS on razor thin commodity sales? They may well be making a buck a seat net, or worse.
I think it is important to discriminate between massive COS low rent commodities and high return flagship products, and the discrimination appears blurred to me on this one.
The ERAS thingy in the 10k PR is feel good, the SFND NHS thingy is barely break-even busy work as currently reported.
NHS, my understanding is that some time ago the NHS deliberately when through a significant devolution process migrating much authority out of Downing and into the local trusts.
So yes, the NHS is not one deal, it is 1000 deals and to say that there is a one deal opportunity out there per se is misleading.
But it may be equally misleading to indicate that there is not a herd component to the NHS. It is not like selling BoA and then selling Citi and then selling 3M. The NHS has early adopters, followers, is largely a herd, and has some rougues (they wear red suits and wink a lot).
I would expect the NHS to function more like a Gaussian deployment registry than say, automobile manufacturers.
Arguments have been made that landing a lead contract in each of the verticals would have carry on contracts withing given verticals. That has not been observed.
I expect that the NHS represents a vertical where one will see much greater herd behavior than one sees in automobile or chemical manufacturing. Not every one of these NHS trust is uniformly packed with peopel who want to spend all the time on the same trieals and negotiations and so on. Once it is established as a common or majority solution, one for which selection can be judged as reasonable, then I imagine many trusts will say "I'll have what she's having".
but alea may well be right, ca. 2015 e.g.
my thinking is that the UK in general is much more of a herd when it comes to technology deployments and so on, the US has standards and so on, but comparatively the UK drinks this stuff. The matter of an SOP for PII DAR compliance is the type of thing that they do, they do as a herd, and the herd can move rather quickly (compared to the US).
mmbd, touche . eom
alea, 10k and cash,
I may be mistaken but I dont recall Wave ever saying in a 10k that they are going to need to raise funds and having it not then happen. There are times where they have said they dont think they will need to raise funds, there are times when they say they will need to raise funds, and when they say they do ... they do.
mmbg, no amount of critical thinking can replace experience, and on this matter I have none. SKS seemed to intimate that it may serve as an additional obstacle (Q2'12 CC??).
I know when I buy things with a reasonably chance of needing support, then who I buy from in on the table along with what I am buying.
On the one hand their name is on NIST 800-147 or 155 or whatever and they are on the TCG board, on the otherhand their balance sheet and income statement look like bat guano.
beats me.
aldn, sure, I think there is a chance for all of the various things SKS said, just as I think there was a chance for various things said before. Most don't happen, and generally they happen slowly.
If there is any truth to the Army supposedly nibbling, euro-gov nibbling, and the air force at least sniffing, then there is a chance these various forces (along with the standard lauundry list of bigs banks and stuff SKS wheels out on a cart every few months) ... then yes, there is a chance that thes things could happen, and that would strengthen Wave's hand for their products and with their investors and with regards to equity markets.
Currently they suffer on all these fronts. Not because of forces outside of their control, but because of mismanagement.
w-train, yup, it is pretty standard with Wave for some best-CC-ever-spin to bring out some bids, often after pre/post-CC SP weakness, and then a delayed-effect fade in a week or so.
The thing seemed to hold up pretty well at around 65 cents, and my feeling for some time has been this CC was a near lock to bring 65 back.
alea, my thinking was HP ad-hoc was choice 3, but we agree.
mmbg, fwiw part of being a solutions/services provider it to be a software provider/implementer, hence they bought the provider of the DDP-E software/services. Currently DDP-A is provided by Wave, and what direction that takes going forward is anybody's guess. Currently the DDP-E elements do not provide the DDP-A elements. The question is whether Dell will find some other solution for DDP-A, stick with the same course for DDP-A, or stick with the same provider ... but not BUNDLE it on all machines in a given class (i.e. be a re-seller like HP). Not bundling (a box maker thingy) and instead selling and deploying separately (more of a services thingy) is not inconsistent with Dell statements on shifting focus. Dell builds boxes, and it may well be that part of their path is to trim the boxes down and customize the deployment (services/software/networking etc) of those boxes instead of trying to have the base box be more impressive as a stand alone item. The question is, how is Dell going to accomplish DDP-A? A different vendor? Develop it in house? Scrap bundling but use the same stuff? Or just extend the current arrangement when they get around to it? I'm thinking 2 or 3, with 3 being slightly more likely. Regarding your question, the Credant DDP-E suite doe snot provide the Wave DDP-A solutions. It definitely leaves SFND mostly out of the loop, but Wave's position in the various layers is not a subset of Credants, hence the interest in using Wave products.
edit: critical to any serious services soultions play is the whole NON-Wintel space. Authenticating Wintel along with NON-wintel is what Wave has been focusing much of their recent efforts on, and if Dell wants to do services seriously they will have to abandon their very very very long dedication to one platform: Wintel.
They have nothing to do with it,
Wave came across some money, and they have to spend it as fast as they can .... it is a Sprague thing. GM + BASF = SFND + Scrambls.
Dell bought one of SFNDs competitors (Credant) the potential for synergy on the Dell front has likely been nil from the beginning.
There was the whole cross-licensing of Protector to Credant, and although I have asked, I have gotten nothing resembling a cogent response.
Perhaps with Dell's considerable backing Credant seeks to reverse engineer DDP-A? Naw. I think Dell will maintain DDP-A, but may prefer to sell it as an upgrade and not a bundle.
Or they choose to keep bundling on get great price concessions.
Or whatever.
yup, I think the
server is getting pummeled by void refresh peeks.
chance, oops, I said Q3 cash 1.2 instead of 2.1 so I s'pose I don't have to cut Q1 staff as drastically as I had (assuming they can book say 8m in sales in Q1, which is highly suspect.
Imagine the mood,
the last three Qs at Wave has seen GoogleMaps searches for the unemployment office ....
-8%, then -10%, most recently -15%, it may be they aren't needing to issue pink slips at this point, sensible folk find different work in that situation.
Not to pile on or anything .... but couple that reality to the in your face caviar gargling at the top and it would seem morale has got to be awful. How hard are salesman working who are looking for different work?
There is more to the running the train off the doughnut hole cliff than just dilution.
The piddly $1m PP was pointed to as they walked around the company and handed out one last round of pink-slips. Then they have the CC, have coffee with their staff on tues and tell them they don't believe they will need to hand out anymore pink slips (because that is what working at Wave is all about ... wondering if you are next).
Q4, $10m, $7m?
Certainly I hope equity financing isn't being called revenue ...., but starting with $1.2m in the bank, bringing in $3.3m in PP money, and $7m of sales gives $11.5 to burn.
That is pretty much what I think happened.
That is no CFBE, not even close, but much closer than Q3 was.
Give Q1 an extra million in revs, a million in PP, and shave another million off expenses and that will be close to (but short of) CFBE. That is what they are going to say in the CC. Q4 will soundly miss CFBE, but they will say they have reached CFBE for current operations. Q1 still won't be CFBE in aggregate, but the last two weeks of March may well be.
expense curve:
Q1'10 SGA 4.1m, RD 2.2m (first GM cash infusion)
Q2'10 SGA 4.6m, RD 2.4m
Q3'10 SGA 4.3m, RD 3.1m
Q4'10 SGA 5.2m, RD 2.6m
Q1'11 SGA 6.1m, RD 3.3m (big GM cash infusion)
Q2'11 SGA 6.2m, RD 3.6m
Q3'11 SGA 7.0m, RD 3.9m (BASF cash infusion)
Q4'11 SGA 9.9m, RD 5.4m (BP cash, SFND on the books)
Q1'12 SGA 9.8m, RD 5.0m (thailand?)
Q2'12 SGA 8.6m, RD 5.1m
Q3'12 SGA 7.8m, RD 4.8m
Q4'12 SGA 6? , RD 5?
It seems to me returning to a SGA consistent with the force they had in Q1'10 + 1-2m for SFND and an effort to maintin RD at 5m is what is likely going on. The TDM/ERAS large account sales team has to be rather demoralized. They can't sell squat and every pay-period is met with pink-slips. RD may well be looking for more secure employment ... and management gargles caviar.
A real mess.
mymoney, (a bit of a ramble here) there is also
the little thing of GM and BASF coming off the books, by no means trivial matters. Those sources of revenue were never replaced, so yes, Dell is a million here and a million there as Dell reduced the royalty on the products they bundle the people don't use (and increased the royalty on products folks are more likely to use), but there were no replacement big fish.
Wave assumed (perhaps they read some internet chat boards) that they would have replacement large orders ... and they didn't. BP jumped in, but only incrementally, seating about 25% of the rumored target deployment. Rather than build sales prudently in keeping with the very sporadic nature of their larger orders, Wave went all in, and staffed as if the flood-gates had opened.
On a positive note, I expect that BP is not done, that BP will continue (through normal replacement) the rest of its machines on line ... but I expected that in reportable pulses, one of those pulses being Q4, and there was no such report.
It could be that BP is replacing more machines, but that they are doing it in more of a monthly/quarterly fashion and surfing sub-8k and that may contribute to the late-timing/small PP. BP round one was 1.7m for 1/4 of the seats (supposedly) and if they are satisfied (who knows) and if they are replacing the remaining at say, 1/16th per quarter instead of 1/4 per year (as in the first installment) then one could imagine BP having been good for 400k in Q4, 400k in Q1 and so on. It still adds up to 1/4 per year, but goes unseen. Obviously it most likely would be a situation of doing particular divisions and offices and so on, and any difficulties with the first deployment would slow everything down. It is worth noting that BP was never formally announced as a buyer of Wave's products, so it seems unlikely Wave would get any sort of courtesy green-light to indicate continuing business. They got to mention the first deal simply because of its size compared to Wave's size, justifying an 8k.
This sort of activity could, potentially, help push Wave closer to alea's 8m for Q4 and away from my 7m for Q4. But something about Wave's desperation, tone, and language in their PR releases to another internet chat board combined with the significant erosion of Dell sales keeps me at 7m.
SFND does appear to be a growing business, not massively growing, but growing. Wave appears to be a shrinking business, but when it does land the occasional deal it is much more noteworthy than SFNDs.
I recall a couple of years ago lamenting the erosion of SMB sales at Wave which folks blew off in the face of the large orders at the time. My argument was +5% QtoQ on underlying SMB was critical for stability and over time added up to real revenue. SKS stated, clearly, that sales efforts were shifted away from SMB and towards large enterprise as the ROI on SMB didn't measure up. So SMB crashed and the large orders never happened. Neglecting bread and butter in order to go hunting for large game increases risk. On this Wave failed. On this Wave created a clear and obvious doughnut hole, one they refused to accept until it was too late, the reality of their income statement caught up to them, and equity markets pulled away from them.
I wish this was an essay in nuanced 20/20 hindsight, but the truth is it was sitting their in plain sight, and SKS rested on the notion that his PR firm would bridge the gap.
The PR firm is putting in overtime now, DoD-RFI-Samsung, but the reality is the comp[any itself is stating that the Wave division expects little until summer (safely far enough away to be forgotten). The irony is SFND is paying the bills, or at least the bills that do get paid.
mymoney
WAVX authorization is 150m shares. The ATM leverages a shelf registration of $20m (not shares, but dollars). Those shares do not require announcements to move. The announcements are the announcement of the shelf and the announcement of the ATM facility. Wave simply uses that facility of shelf registered shares from time to time. The last PP was unregistered shares. Those unregistered shares and any share coming off the shelf and all other shares are all in the overall cap of 150m shares. So the last PP was essentially printed out of thin air, and Wave can print such shares out of thin air up to their authorization limit of 150m shares of which something like 125m is spoken for (very rough guess).
I expect Wave will likely have to do a reverse split and will bury an authorization increase into a shareholder referendum masquerading as a vote on the revsplit (as they did last time). They obviously need to raise the authorization limit. Scrambls alone burns about 2m shares a year and there is no way that is Michael's last cool idea. SBcomp is likely around another 1-2m per year, payroll via equity financing is another 5-10m shares a year.
Seeing that a revsplit is as likely as not, in the event of a revsplit that is when the company will go to shareholders to increase the authorization limit.
SKS indicated in his public-private-whispers to their PR agency (an internet chat board) that they do not expect revs from Samsung util summer, and it seems foolish to expect meaningful DoD befroe summer, and seeing that delisting is a summer thing, and the SHM is a summer thing, it seems the RevSplit-SHM-ShareAuthLimitRaise-MegaBuillishSamsungTalk is what the summer will be all about. And people can gush over gilder. And maybe even shake his hand (HandShakeOsm).
What the PP says is that
speculation of $10m in Q4 revs is way off the mark, IMO. I'm sticking with $7m, $7-8m if one seeks a range, but rounding to 7. That is what the PP says. $10m is too close to CFBE to get taken to the woodshed for a piddly $1m.
alea, spot on
"They were negotiating from a very weak position. Or they negotiated exceptionally poorly."
Somebody familiar with the company knows they are on the ropes and took them to the woodshed.
So even while an ATM facility was in place to afford large individual investments in the absence of consequent SP increases, this investor knew more, and leveraged Wave's remarkably weak position.
The bullish spin by some is remarkable.
Is there anything short of the drying ink of a filing or bankruptcy that is not bullish ... anything?
Dell could cancel their agreement tomorrow, it would be spun as bullish.
It says remarkable things about the human spirit, not all of which are negative.
alea, the ATM affords the placement of shares without driving the price up.
The ATM, as far as price is concerned, provides a stable market for both the investor and for Wave. Were Wave to just start chucking shares onto Nasdaq, the price would fall. Were an investor to just start buying shares off the Nasdaq the price would rise. The ATM allows Wave and the buyer to set a price (largely determined by the prevailing market) and execute the transaction without causing market disruption.
That is what the ATM does. So the notion that an investor could take a significant position without affecting SP is to ignore the ATM. The ATM is there, the facility affords settlement at a fix price, the notion of buying pressure driving the price for a single large investor is false. That is what the ATM does ... price stability for potential investors.
The PP (as claimed) is simply a deliberate fleecing of current investors.
If somebody approached Wave as asserted and wanted to invest a million dollars but had concerns about driving the SP up then Wave can accommodate that. Wave simply gives them the number to the ATM representative, the ATM privately negotiates the transaction as stated in Wave's SEC filing regarding the ATM facility, Wave approves the negotiated sale and wallah ... it's done.
If however Wave wanted to move unregistered shares, and a buyer wanted some warrants and so on ... then one gets this sort of thing.
It has nothing to do with things affecting the SP. That claim is false.
IN order for it to NOT be a deliberate fleecing of current investors, Wave must have needed the money, and efforts to get the money through they ATM didn't look good, and an investor strapped Wave to a barrel and rolled 'em.
The notion of driving the SP up is simply false.
wildman, I was waiting for somebody to point out the SeekingAlpha timing from an annonmous contributor .. but hey their disclosure did say they were long WAVX.
scrambls cost more than $1m so far,
even by their own circuitous statements.
title, wave capitalizing
well, to the extent that the market became capitalized they did. In the last three years Wave has reported about $88m in revenue from the "TPM market" and the "market for SEDs" (yes, there is some Safend in there). Certainly they did not capitalize profitably, and FWIW most of their revenue is from bundling.
As it appears any nearer term Samsung revenue would be bundling as well, one can reasonably presume (well, that is if Wave and Samsung actually have a deal, that that deal actually involves bundling, and that Samsung actually ships anything bundled) that Wave will at least capitalize on the mobile market in a manner at least equal to their capitalization of the PC market. That is, one can reasonably presume that they will pull in some millions from Samsung (the leading mobile maker) just as they did from Dell (a leading PC maker).
Whether that similarly fizzles into the abyss of sustainable unprofitability remains to be seen.
There is no question that when this management (word used loosely in this sense) runs into some money they start chucking out the window as fast as they can. They call it investing in the future, and some of it is clearly investing in the future. And some of it is to pay staff to do nothing (not that said staff doesn't try, they just don't succeed). They cannot discriminate between investment and a toilet, and are either unwilling or unable to address that shortcoming through the employment of somebody who can tell the difference between using money and burning money.
rwk, you might have a point on exhaustive polling,
not that I understand at all why you think exhaustive polling has a place in forming an opinion on WAVX.
One could assume all is well, seeing that there is no exhaustive polling to indicate otherwise? Whew.
I advise reading the transcripts for the last 4 conference calls and reading the SEC filings for the last 4 quarters.
No exhaustive polling required.
Just the facts. (or polling if the facts are uncomfortable)
Sound consideration of the investment is best made by looking at the statements of the company, the performance of the company and the audited filings of the company.
Such information can be found here:
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=8907962-790-219279&type=sect&dcn=0001104659-12-076713
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=8762563-790-211781&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=3659&ppu=%252fDefault.aspx%253fcompanyid%253d3659%2526amp%253bformtypeID%253d13
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=8607479-788-182039&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=3659&ppu=%252fDefault.aspx%253fcompanyid%253d3659%2526amp%253bformtypeID%253d13
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/DisplayFiling.aspx?TabIndex=2&FilingID=8233117&companyid=3659&ppu=%252fDefault.aspx%253fcompanyid%253d3659%2526amp%253bformtypeID%253d13
and here:
http://www.atomicbobs.com/index.php?mode=read&id=699136
http://www.atomicbobs.com/index.php?mode=read&id=699137
http://www.atomicbobs.com/index.php?mode=read&id=714506
http://www.atomicbobs.com/index.php?mode=read&id=714507
http://seekingalpha.com/article/801351-wave-systems-ceo-discusses-q2-2012-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=7&p=qanda&l=last
http://seekingalpha.com/article/997231-wave-systems-ceo-discusses-q3-2012-results-earnings-call-transcript?source=email_rt_article_title&ifp=0
The above information is rather informative, although I am not aware of it containing any polling.
barge, I just saw an episode of
"Sharks" were a gentleman proposed (and is in discussions with black and decker) to use the proximity features of a smart phone to unlock a door. Or, send a key to a friend so they can get in, revoke the keys as needed, put time limits on keys and so on.
Unique keys, share-able, revocable, expirable, all based on smartphone proximity (and yes, one can still use their normal key).
And, a couple of sharks did bite for 500k to fund securing the patents.
Wave seems to patent rarely, it costs money, takes time (money), and that money goes into bonuses, not securing inventions. Most of Waves patents do not come from Wave, they come from people or things Wave has bought.
The priority in bonuses, not patent protection.
The gentlemen was explicit in expanding the reach well beyond hard-ware from door locks .... wouldn't the ultimate irony be Wave getting sued for infringement on such matters.
The bonuses are obviously well spent money :)
title, I would require a demonstration of competency
in critical areas where the scoreboard says there is none.
And I don't want to hear about "positioning" and "products", those are only some aspects of running a business, they are only part of the big picture.
More optimistic folks may chose to ignore the big picture and focus on those subsets of running a business if they are so inclined, but my experience with investing in WAVX is that it is not kind to those who ignore the big picture.
So, when the portions of the picture that are nothing but broken mirrors and broken records are repaired, I could certainly consider buying, but it seems there is no remedy in place for these broken areas and current shareholders are apparently firmly against it, indicating it is unlikely to change.
2013 Prediction:
So a hat has been hung on the software refresh to lead to a pot of gold for Wave .... Win8 baby !!!
And the gold won't be there as forecast ...
and the story will move to a requirement for a hardware refresh ...
TPM 2.0 over TPM 1.2 baby !!!
Fasten your seat belts.
hey blue, it is a tough thingy to read once one loses the tab markers ....
the years where INTC was a 10% customer are 2004 and 2005
This table (I could have been in error when I entered) indicates :
2004 gross:209k INTC:36k
2005 gross:1019k INTC:134k
in 2004 the other 10% customer was usg (I can't even remember who usg is) but that was for 88k.
in 2005 stm was worth 468k and winbond 157k.
These are paltry sums, but it is an error to go in the direction of saying the relationships were fiction. The data is that the relationship were subsumed mostly by Wave's Dell relationship ... (INTC could very well have continued to pay a 35k ... but that ain't 10% any more).
BRCM, popped onto the screen in 2006 for 336k, and then vanished. Note that BRCM was the chip provider to Dell, and double billing was likely emerging. Indeed, for those who pay close attention to the Dell site, "Wave" TPM drivers were being wisked into and out of the various BRCM offerings and so on (as Wave was providing the driver twice).
I agree the company is a train wreck (or appears to be so) but not all of these things were entirely phantom-ware. These were real deals, software was sold, 10% status was achieved, and it seems the solution migrated to the box maker, of which only Dell has been the only thing resembling a cash cow in that effort.
blue from the data set and given the values of
INTC and the other chip.board folks and the rapidly rising Dell revs, I cannot conclude whether INTC, BRCM etc stopped doing business with Wave, or whether Dell pushed them into sub-10% status.
It is not material.
The point is this: all of Wave's deals with chip/board folks have amounted to little, its deal with a full box OEM (Dell) amounted to more, optimists hope that its deals with current full-box OEM (Acer, Samsung) will amount to more, but there is plenty of room for sketicism.
erroring on fact is as good as stuffing words in peoples mouths, both have no value. seek value.
blue more on 10%,
not that any of this means anything, but I maintained a very simple 10% spreadsheet (I have stopped collecting and maintaining data for WAVX)
but here it is, and rather brief:
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
dell 0 0 1094 4483 7049 15281 20714 22400
stm 0 468 776 682 0 0 0
brcm 0 0 336 0 0 0 0
usg 88 0 320 0 0 0 0
intc 36 134 0 0 0 0 0
winbond 0 157 0 0 0 0 0
124 759 2526 5165 7049 15281 20714 22400
gross 209 1019 3116 6307 8810 18889 26051 37000
0.593301435 0.74484789 0.810654685 0.818931346 0.800113507 0.808989359 0.795132624 0.605405405
blue, actually, 10% of a dollar is pretty easy to hit.
In filings, Wave has over its years reported the follwoing as 10% customers:
dell
stm
brcm
usg
intc
winbond
Certainly Dell persisted in this fashion, but you state plainly that the past did not happen.
yours: "Wave claimed "close" relationships with IBM, Intel, HP and many other big corporations.
I couldn't prove there were no real relationships, but the revenue stream from these giants never reached the 10% reporting threshhold."
please visit www.(anything).com/WAVX annual report 2004 and 2005 re: INTC. (e.g.)
The company is a train wreck, one can easily illustrate that without resorting to error.
blue,
In some areas Wave adapts, in some areas Wave improves, in some areas Wave is stagnant unchanging and ill-equipped.
I think all know this ... well, o.k. many know this, alea, tkc, cls, telstar, you, I, many many others.
Many see that Wave adapts in some areas, continues to feed its technology, but in some areas it is the unadaptive or maladaptive ogre that it is.
I have always seen that ogre. Indeed, I would argue I saw that ogre before you (but we really on't need to quibble on that).
The challenge, as investors, has been how to rank these truths.
We acknowledge the truth of nepotism.
And we acknowledge the truth of a perceived growing market.
We acknowledge a perceived truth of an applicable product suite.
We acknowledge a lapdog shareholder base.
We acknowledge government directives.
We acknowledge scare resources advertising stupid cars.
We, investors, struggle to appropriately prioritize these things. Wherein are the trumps?
Is sick nepotism alone enough to trump the rest? I stomached sick nepotism as long as cash-flow was sound. They ran cash-flow off a cliff, that pretty much does it for me. I was bullsih when cash-flow was adequate, I am bearish when it is not. My sentiments on cash flow pretty much directly correlate to SP.
Its not the folks see or do not see things, it is that dynamically they value certain things greater than others at a particular moment. Some, it seems, continue to value the potential market so highly that they willingly continue to ignore that the car is out of gas, the driver is drunk, and the nice place is unlikely to be reached in such a circumstance.
But, I have seen drunk guys get a rust bucket Vega to the nice campground before, ... it is just that it is not very likely.
Win 8 has nothing to do with the survival of WAVX.
It might play into the future growth of WAVX, but it has nothing to do with the survival of WAVX and has nothing to do with the DoD and WAVX.
Read WAVX quarterly SEC filings for clarity on the matter.
Please, mix it up a little and read what Wave has to say on Wave regarding DoD in its quarterly reports.
Wave's survival has nothing to do with Win8.
In understand that reading what Wave says about Wave might pop a few bubbles (barge) but these are SEC documents, they are audited, they are probative, and they are what Wave says about Wave.
waveway, doD has nothing to do with Win8, see Wave last 5 quarterly reports on piloting and platform certification. They didn't spend 1.8m certifying pre_Win8 stuff to depend on Win8. Read.
waveway. 2014 is a long ways away.
Blue, I cannot see any future raft as the same as the old raft,
that is simply exporting my prejudice.
Yes, I see that many rafts were stated to be things they were not. I cannot attach those rafts to subsequent rafts. I think dismissing subsequent rafts because of past rafts is flawed thinking.
But I don't look for rafts.
I do not expect replacement rates for Win8 to drive the DoD market, and that is where I believe they have hung their hat.
I expect DoD to use Win8 sometime around 2015. OK maybe 2014 ... but not a day sooner.
So, while barge asks me to opine on Win8 ... I am here to talk about Wave Systems ... and I see no Win8 relevance in the immediate or near future.
Win8 is a marker for a market direction and relevance to certain ideas, but the kinetics of Win8 cannot be confused with the requirements of WAVX. Yes, Win8 represents a TCG hump. Yippee. Yayoooo. Happy Happy. All good and well ... but getting back to WAVX ...
TYhey have near term needs to win contracts to last until that day (should that day be what barge et al proclaim) but that day is 2014.
So ...
Can they sell anything between now and then.
They are all in n DoD.
Commercial customers have walked from them (matters of solvency, matters of market confusion, I don't know ... they cannot seem to follow up on BP)
Which of course brings up BP ... will Wave see a deal for essentially the rest of the BP bid as they did with GM?) Is that the mystical crack pipe stuff SKS referred to in CC3?
BP got in for 18k seats against a stated (by other sources) plan for 80k seats.
18 K was 1.7m
Closing out the reminder is some 7+M , not a new client, not a new deal, just flushing out the old deal ... unless their products sucks or their support is not up to the support they provided to GM.
But all data IS, that with BP alone, in filling out that opportunity there is still 7+m on the table.
That has long been in my guesser table, I expect BP for more in Q4.
blue, I believe you are establishing a set of either ors and imposing a set of either ors on others such as alea.
I submit that while either ors are comfortable and make for easy truth charts, they may or may not reliably outline the future in either event.
So yes, I think they need mgmnt change.
And perhaps there are lots of competing products to wave's flying off the shelves.
OR maybe they produced some stuff prior to broad enough market acceptance (it is not that they haven't sold anything,they simply haven't sold enough).
OR in the current environment Wave CAN sell, and you say they CAN'T ... the truth is in between, they sell, just not enough.
Certainly the confluence of the product, the salespeople, and the market is not not a good one. You seem to require assigning it to
"the product or the sales people"
and I see three things here and not two.
I am concerned that Wave may be desperately holding to a price point that is not working. That is not a salepeople thing, they are not allowed to sell below prices determined by management.
There is, of course, the notion that nobody buys this type of infrastructure from an nearly insolvent enterprise.
I reject your binaries.
I do think the company is run by trolls, that they steered the train off a cliff, and that I expect them to do the exact same thing in the event they do win a big deal that brings them solvency.
It is now well demonstrated, these guys are dumber than dinosaurs on running a business. Nothing short of personal replacement will likely amend my opinion on that. And on most things I am usually the last (or at least well within the heard) so I cannot imagine the street warming up to Wave.
Fortunately, for me, they put decals on cars. That told me to look daily for sell opportunities.
I am inclined to agree with alea ... they have walked away from EVERYTHING ... they have all of their chips in a basket called DoD for April.
Lotteries. Lightning. And DoD in April.
The equity is not really worth following beyond that.
I have, and I am serious, not even bothered to read the Q3 financials.
I know it is as bad as it can be, I am confident that reading the numbers would only demonstrate it to be worse than that.
This company will fail completely. Its loyal shareholders will walk away with little but a few crumbs. Some sort of garage sale will occur, likely next summer. The company will likely go for something less than $35m.
I don't see much else to talk about.
blue,
accumulated interest payable to Wave.
I'm not sure how one can take Wave's loan and Wave accruable interest to Wave and sum them as a measure of the size of the WXP cash hole.
If I loan myself money and lose that money it seems taking on the interest I was going to pay myself is a bit odd to call an expenditure.
I'd stick with the 47m.
That is plenty in and of itself for no return.