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.
Rachel, that being the case what if WXP never turns a profit and is shuttered. Wouldn't this have to be written off as a loss since they were expecting something back at a later date, the same way a shareholder would write off a stock for a company that folds?
Dave
Beaten to death or not I think this deserves some discussion and an answer:
from 9/04
Through September 30, 2004, Wave had provided approximately $42.4 million in funds to Wavexpress
March of 05
March 31, 2005, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $36.5 million in cash
no ammended filing to be found.
This isn't just a WXP problem Larry, this is discrepency in a publically filed document that I can't sem to find a reason for, and nobody has pointed in a direction that would clear this up. Sure I could call IR, but that dosen't eliminate this very public record. I will be droping an e-mail to them as well. They were kind enough to provide me with some figures this morning. That still doesn't change a very interesting situation in my eyes. At best, it's just plain shoddy to not have explained this in the following 10-q where this showed up. 6 million dollars should not up and vanish. To wave this off as beating a dead horse does a diservice to Wave sharholders, incoming and longs like myself.
Dave
WXP numbers not adding up......
Here is 2005 and 2006 10-Q figures
Through March 31, 2006, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $38.5 million in cash, plus approximately $12.2 million in accrued interest.
From June 2005.......Through June 30, 2005, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $37 million in cash, plus approximately $9.3 million in accrued interest.
A look at 2004 reveals Wave claiming a funding of 39.4M to Wavexpress higher than 05, and 06 The Interest was 6.0 at this juncture. I thought maybe they might have made money here but that was not the case....
"Wavexpress’ net losses included in Wave’s consolidated financial statements were approximately $928,000 and $957,000 for the quarters ended March 31, 2004 and March 31, 2003, respectively."
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/919013/000110465904014555/a04-5897_110q.htm
from 6/30/04
Through June 30, 2004, Wave had provided approximately $40.9 million in funds to Wavexpress
from 9/04
Through September 30, 2004, Wave had provided approximately $42.4 million in funds to Wavexpress
now in March of 05 we see this
March 31, 2005, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $36.5 million in cash
I could not find any ammended filling. This 6M dollar discrepency doesn't seem like small potatoes to me folks and if somebody can explain where it went I would be glad to hear it. This thing stinks more to me the longer I look at it.
Dave
check the 10-q's for yourself
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?type=10-q&dateb=&owner=include&count=100&act...
Rachel..........
I could have figured wrongly, but I took the burn and added the accrued interest to that total as I am assuming this has to be paid back somewhere to someone
Through March 31, 2006, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $38.5 million in cash, plus approximately $12.2 million in accrued interest.
From June 2005.......Through June 30, 2005, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $37 million in cash, plus approximately $9.3 million in accrued interest.
Dave
Slate, WXP net loss
As disclosed in Wave's 10-Q:
Wavexpress’ net losses included in Wave’s consolidated financial statements were approximately $593,000 and $546,000 for the three-month periods ended June 30, 2006 and June 30, 2005, respectively, and $1,194,000 versus $1,146,000 for the six-month periods ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Wavexpress’ net losses included in Wave’s consolidated financial statements were approximately $530,000 and $900,000 for the quarters ended September 30, 2005 and September 30, 2004, respectively, and $1,676,000 versus $2,800,000 for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively..
Through March 31, 2006, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $38.5 million in cash, plus approximately $12.2 million in accrued interest. Approximately $9.5 million automatically converted into 1,826,570 additional shares of Wavexpress at an average conversion price of $5.20 per share. These amounts are eliminated in consolidation.
From June 2005
Wave has funded Wavexpress through a series of convertible notes, some with attached warrants. The notes bear interest at the rate of 2% to 3% above the Prime Rate of Chase Manhattan Bank. Generally, the notes are convertible into shares of common stock of Wavexpress at varying prices per share. Through June 30, 2005, Wave has funded Wavexpress with approximately $37 million in cash, plus approximately $9.3 million in accrued interest. Approximately $9.5 million automatically converted into 1,826,570 additional shares of Wavexpress at an average conversion price of $5.20 per share. These amounts are eliminated in consolidation.
As of June 30, 2005, Wave owned 69% of Wavexpress while Sarnoff owned 25.6%. None of the minority shareholders have provided, or are obligated to provide, funding to Wavexpress. Accordingly, the financial statements of Wavexpress have been included in the consolidated financial statements of Wave for all periods presented herein. In addition, Wave has not recorded a minority interest in Wavexpress in the consolidated financial statements and therefore has reflected 100% of Wavexpress’ balance sheet and operating results in its consolidated financial statements. Wavexpress’ net losses included in Wave’s consolidated financial statements were approximately $546,000 and $948,000 for the quarters ended June 30, 2005 and June 30, 2004, respectively, and $1,146,000 versus $1,900,000 for the six-month periods ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively..
Cash burn of approx. 1.5 Million for WXP from 05-06
also tack on an additon 2.3 Million in accrued interest
call it 1.2M a quarter
Dave
Rachel, just from googling tonight I think there are enough different gorilla type players already elbowing the way in here that WXP can never even reach a point where it recoup all the money it has spent to get to the point where it is today. And we have to say that despite it's position with MSFT it can be seen as nothing more than an abject abysmal failure. What happens in the future-no one here can state with any sort certainty- has no bearing on what has come to pass. This has been a sucking sewer from which precious funds have been lost. Never mind the fact that this has had an absolute effect on shareholder value. You can't convince me that some of the dillution we have experienced could have been lessened somewhat, or pushed out further had this cash waster not been bleeding funds. To me any clear cut advantage they had in this space has been lost this year. A lot of folks that were asleep at the switch have leapt into action. There are partnerships being forged and content available today in the marketplace. And I don't see WXP tied to any of these. Great, they are spotlighted with MSFT media center. People use RealPlayer, Quicktime and a whole slew of other media devices. People have the choice on how they bring the content in. TPM is more cut and dried. Wave has something special that fostered them to the fore and clustered them among the giants. At this point having WXP tied to the windows media center is akin to being one of those games that come packaged with windows. And I can't tell you the last time I even opened that folder.
The time for brushing this aside is over. Wave can no longer afford this diversion. I am sure they envisioned great things for this. I am sure they thought Fin-Read, EDS and others would too. This thing needs to join what ever the hell that shopping portal was on the shelf. If this dough is burning a hole in their pocket I would much rather see a more aggressive marketing for Sign-Online than this.
Dave
Secure Video Processing Alliance
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3647
Move over iTunes. Here comes the Secure Video Processor Alliance Posted by David Berlind @ 9:30 am
Meet Jas Saini. He's chairman of the Secure Video Processor Alliance — an alliance whose members are not about to take Apple's incursion into the home entertainment and content multiplexing market lying down.
The battle to be your content multiplexer is on. It's a battle that most people don't even know is taking place. But it is. And it's too early to declare a winner. What is a content multiplexer? It's the device — essentially a cache — that lives at the nexus of the converging worlds of computer technology and the entertainment industry. Think of it as the train station through which all content — for example, a movie — arrives into your home and is then subsequently distributed to other consumption componentry. Apple's iTunes software is one of the most well known examples. Via its Internet-based connection, it can take delivery of content from the iTune Music Store and distribute it to other components. In addition to being able to burn music to a CD for use on a CD player, it can also distribute content to Apple's portable playback devices (iPods), other computers running the iTunes software, and, announced last week, to a device that lives in your home entertainment center — a device that Apple has codenamed iTV. Last week, Apple announced that movies would be available through the iTunes music store — thereby expanding the scope of content types that iTunes can aggregate and distribute.
Apple is not alone in its quest to be the central cache for all your content. There's at least one other company — your local cable TV provider — that in some cases already has that job and wants to keep it. In the cable TV world, content is delivered through pipes that are owned and manged by the cable TV provider (the wire outside your house) into your Personal Video Recorder (PVR, a TiVo device is an example of one of these) and then from there, the PVR takes on the role of being the content multiplexer. As far as PVR content multiplexers go, TiVo was one of the first to demonstrate this capability with a service known as TiVo-to-Go that could transfer content from your TiVo PVR to a portable playback device. More recently however, Motorola has demonstrated a similar architecture, capable of moving content from its PVRs to its mobile handsets such as the Motorola Q smartphone.
The battle doesn't stop there. Then, there's your local phone company — the Baby Bells whose primary source of revenue (the voice business) is being devastated by competing services from the local cable companies, and more recently, from Voice-over-IP technoloiges like Skype that work over the Internet connection (in some cases, a connection that the phone company itself is providing). In an effort to survive, the Baby Bells are diversifying into the content delivery space as well. Using their exclusive access to the dark (unused) fiber optic technology that may already have been installed outside your home, the phone companies are gearing up to deliver extremely high quality content (eg: Hi-definition) through services like Video-on-Demand and, rest assured, they're just as interested in being your content multiplexer as Apple and the cable guys are.
But wait, there's more. Ripping a page out of Apple's book, Microsoft is, between its forthcoming Zune brand and its Media Center PC, also gunning to handle all of your content multiplexing. DirecTV, electric utilities and other outfits that already have a "content consumption" relationship with consumers want in as well and now, even some large merchants are tossing their hats into the ring. Amazon, for example, recently joined the fray with its Unbox video service for downloading movies and, while these mostly wire-line providers duke it out, many of the cellular phone companies are quietly looking to sneak around center court with a come-from-nowhere win that leverages their wireless connections as the delivery vehicle.
This brings me to my next point which is that to be declared the winner in the content multiplexing market is the equivalent of winning all the marbles. Because of the convergence that's happening between technology, telecommunications, and entertainment, the stakes in this battle are extremely high. Whereas some outfits like Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon are happy to rely on a delivery pipe they don't own (the Internet), the phone, cable, satellite (DirecTV), and cellco companies see their wholly owned pipes as an important competitive weapon in their arsenals.
So far so good, right? Convergence is good for the user experience. Right? Now, instead of having to figure out how to alligator-clip together a path from the source of our content to our playback technologies, these companies are willing to step in and take the friction out for us. And competition is supposedly good. Right? With so many companies vying to be our one stop content multiplexing shop, consumers should benefit in the way of lower prices for more innovative products and services. There is one problem though. Compatibility. Under the hoods of these many different approaches are a variety of anti-piracy technologies (often referred to as Digital Rights Management or DRM) that are incompatible with each other which in turn means that the ultimate end-to-end offerings from the various combantants are also imcompatible with each other. The net result for those who want to reap the benefits of such turnkey, friction-free, end-to-end solutions today, is that they must make a choice that they're prepared to stick with for the long run. Unless the compatibility differences are worked out, switching could mean throwing out all of your content and your gear and starting from scratch.
So, who will it be? In hopes of giving the cable companies and PVR companies a fighting chance in the war to be the dominant content multiplexer, the Secure Video Processor Alliance (the SVP Alliance) has established a hardware-based anti-piracy standard that it says will be embedded in a great many consumer devices (PVRs, portable music and video players, big screen displays, etc.) moving forward. In a podcast interview (accessible by way of streaming or download using the embedded player at the top of this blog), Jas Saini, told me of how the technology is better than software approaches to anti-piracy (like Apple's FairPlay) because of the way it's embedded in the silicon from companies like Texas Instruments, ST Micro, and Broadcom (each of whom is an Alliance member).
This along with the Alliance's 35-member strong roster (currently excludes some big players like Microsoft, Apple, Intel, and TiVo) and yesterday's announcements that compliant-products are soon to be delivered could turn cable TV and PVR providers into more attractive partners for content publishers like movies studios and record labels that struggle with piracy. Especially now that the software-based approaches from both Microsoft and Apple have proven fallible. Can the Alliance and its growing membership stage a come from behind win? Saini thinks so. I'm not so sure. Listen to the podcast to find out how Saini responds to a pretty tough line of questioning.
Hawkshaw, if you notice this has been spotlighted since March of 2005, and we still have nothing to show for it. Bottom line is the market has caught them and passed them by in this space.
Not one mention of Wavexpress on a google search of download PC service and a few other combinations.
Check out Slingbox This thing will let you watch whatever TV service you have at home from anywhere in the world on your PC. One time cost-no fees
http://www.slingmedia.com/us/
Here are a few other links to peruse
Siemens
http://www.efytimes.com/efytimes/fullnews.asp?edid=14392
Wal-mart
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=google&guid=%7BAD549...
Amazon
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;862921357
4flix.net-never heard of em but they are trying to make money here
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=15817&Page=1&pagePos=2
Here's something called EyeTV
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/03/17/eyetv.eyeconnect/
Direct TV -looks like more of a set top box deal with Intel
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6119790.html
Intel Million Dollar Challenge-
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/09/26/intel.offers.1m.challenge/
Cinema Now
http://www.playfuls.com/news_04475_CinemaNow_and_Universal_Pictures_Launch_Day_and_Date.html
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2020787,00.asp
Apple
http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/26/technology/movie_downloads.fortune/?postversion=2006092613
Tech Review article
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/posts.aspx?id=17419&author=king
Dave
Wavxmaster first I am not pissed. As far as facts go, WXP has been part of MSFT offering for awhile and has not added up to squat. Sure the market might be there for them in the future. This however has not stopped other companies operating in this same space from making or trying to make money in a very public way- Disney movie downloads etc. and these companies are not highlighted AFAIK. The time has come to stop giving this cash drain a free pass on what might be coming in the future. Look we can see the demand for TPM, the OEM's are driving this. There is real cash value on the horizon here driven by the OEM's and not the consumer first. Wave will get paid in this space. There is no guarentee of making money off WXP when it is the content user and not the OEM provider driving the acceptance here, especially in light of other formats that are already in play.
Dave
Wavxmaster, I think this find should not have insults hurled towards it, nor towards those that have actually taken the time to respond to it. We all know who Wave has deals with, that they are the main player in this field, some would say the leader in this field. Wavexpress has had it's fair share of detractors and I think it has been well deserved. The move into the apartment space really really did not sit well with many here. The problem I have, and I think everybody should have with this, is that you have a company on the verge (hopefully) of becoming a very visible entity. How can you not know it's illegal to operate a business in a non commercial district? When you and your family have been operating businesses for years? You also make the move public?!!? In a city that probably has the highest rates charged for occupancy in the US, I think this might attract someone more than a yahooligan droping a dime. This might not seem like a big deal, but it looks like nothing more than minor leagues to me. This company needs to rise above this crap, and believe me this is crap on a high order. You need to get your house in order. This was handled like this was some sort of work at home medical transcribing business- not to belittle that profession. The time has come to cut bait on what has all appearances of a hobby at this juncture to me. There are other companies that are providing as we speak, what we were told Wavexpress would provide. Granted it may not be delivering content in the same exact manner as WXP would provide but that has not stopped these other entries from coming to the marketplace. If this technology is so "cool" maybe it is time to sell it off. If, if the trusted market is going to be as far reaching as we seem to think they don't need WXP to survive. A sale of WXP could help bring an infusion of cash and eliminate a fundage drain going back a number of years. This hobby and year over year cash drain needs to go. If they can find a buyer.
Dave
Quite possibly somebody who has thought the future has looked bright for Wave, Dell and Intel since the first signs that Wave was working with these giants a few years ago. While some folks might find it hard to believe anyone would be selling here, just as many would say it's hard to believe so many are still here hanging on. The longer this goes on, the more days will come like this as long as there continues to be an abscence of revenue guarenteed announcements. There are people that have been in a long time, continued buying all that time and now sees the price inching backwards. This is "No Mas" effect. People are tired, and getting out. It certainly isn't trading. It dosen't help if you are following other stocks and watching them make a move while your cash is tied up in old Wave. I still believe if and when this thing goes it will be fast and furious, otherwise I would be moving my cash out and trading into other positions. That being said, I've never claimed to be a market timer and have not held on this long to watch the boat take off with me on the dock. While the prospects look bright, it hasn't been reflected one iota in the shareprice, there is no denying this. And until there is guarenteed revs pouring in, these are still nothing more than prospects, albeit very very good ones-the ones I would want to have if I were in Wave's position. I feel for those who have held so long, only to sell now. I wholeheartedly understand it, as silently some of you do as well.
Dave
IBM.. the spanner in the works is here.
Until we/I see beyond a shadow of a doubt that Wave can somehow enhance whatever it is that ISSX has to offer, it has to be looked at as a challenge, based on the fact that IBM has not as of yet offered any sort of Wave viable product that we are aware of. ISSX is not a member of the TCG and IBM nowe possibly brings another product to the table that the TCG body may now take a closer look at. This is taking nothing away from Wave, who may or may not have the best and most viable solution out there that runs on any platform. IBM is IBM. IBM has cache. Wave does not. Wave has a solution that runs across many platforms. IBM has a solution that does not. We don't know what this ISS means as of yet. True the open standard across all platforms may be nice, but when there are so few platforms deployed, a change in direction would not be difficult at this point especially with IBM muscle behind it. Some may argue about delays in roll out etc.. but, that's all this has been about up to now, pilot testing and delays, not platform's deployed and upgrades. This should be very interesting to watch.
Dave
recently purchased by IBM
Filenet- content management
Webify Solutions- service oriented architectures
MRO Software-MRO's software helps customers manage physical assets and corresponding financial, operational and technology details, IBM said. For instance, aviation companies use MRO's tools to keep track of planes, ground-support equipment and hangars. The company also works with energy, manufacturing, pharmaceutical, telecommunications and utilities firms.
Vista hacked at Black Hat
Joris Evers, Special to ZDNet
August 07, 2006
URL: http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Vista_hacked_at_Black_Hat/0,2000061744,39265689,00.htm
While Microsoft talked up Windows Vista security at Black Hat, a researcher in another room demonstrated how to hack the operating system.
Joanna Rutkowska, a Polish researcher at Singapore-based Coseinc, showed that it is possible to bypass security measures in Vista that should prevent unsigned code from running.
In the second part of her talk, Rutkowska explained how it is possible to use virtualisation technology to make malicious code undetectable, in the same way a rootkit does. She code-named this malicious software Blue Pill.
"Microsoft is investigating solutions for the final release of Windows Vista to help protect against the attacks demonstrated," a representative for the software maker said. "In addition, we are working with our hardware partners to investigate ways to help prevent the virtualisation attack used by the Blue Pill."
At Black Hat, Microsoft gave out copies of an early Vista release for attendees to test. The software maker is still soliciting feedback on the successor to Windows XP, which is slated to be broadly available in January.
Rutkowska's presentation filled a large ballroom at Caesars Palace to capacity, even though it was during the last time slot on the final day of the annual Black Hat security confab in Las Vegas. She used an early test version of Vista for her research work.
As one of the security measures in Vista, Microsoft is adding a mechanism to block unsigned driver software to run on the 64-bit version of the operating system. However, Rutkowska found a way to bypass the shield and get her code to run. Malicious drivers could pose a serious threat because they run at a low level in the operating system, security experts have said.
"The fact that this mechanism was bypassed does not mean that Vista is completely insecure. It's just not as secure as advertised," Rutkowska said. "It's very difficult to implement a 100 percent-efficient kernel protection."
To stage the attack, however, Vista needs to be running in administrator mode, Rutkowska acknowledged. That means her attack would be foiled by Microsoft's User Account Control, a Vista feature that runs a PC with fewer user privileges. UAC is a key Microsoft effort to prevent malicious code from being able to do as much damage as on a PC running in administrator mode, a typical setting on Windows XP.
"I just hit accept," Rutkowska replied to a question from the audience about how she bypassed UAC. Because of the many security pop-ups in Windows, many users will do the same without realising what they are allowing, she said.
Microsoft has touted Vista as its most secure version of Windows yet. It is the first operating system client to go through the company's Security Development Lifecycle, a process to vet code and stamp out flaws before a product ships.
"Windows Vista has many layers of defence, including the firewall, running as a standard user, Internet Explorer Protected Mode, /NX support, and ASLR, which help prevent arbitrary code from running with administrative privileges," the Microsoft representative noted.
After the presentation on bypassing the driver shield, Rutkowska presented a way to create the stealthy malicious software she code-named Blue Pill. The technique uses Pacifica, a Secure Virtual Machine, from chipmaker Advanced Micro Devices, to go undetected.
Blue Pill could serve as a backdoor for attackers, Rutkowska said. While it was developed on Vista and AMD's technology, it should also work on other operating systems and hardware platforms. "Some people suggested that my work is sponsored by Intel, as I focused on AMD virtualisation technology only," she said, adding that is untrue.
Even if they had those figures Snack I think, in retrospect to where the share price sits today after the Q2 release, they probably made the best and only move available to them. I must say that the stock has reacted far better than I thought or hoped even leading into the CC. Those numbers that were released, while not taking us over 1.00 pre split will at least help cement the stock well above the 1.38 marked for a long time to come.
Dave
I got out before you did fortunately, or unfortunately however you look at it!!
Dave
Just for you Unclever, sorry I was so untimely to provide you with my list
Gadzoox, Quokka Sports,Harlyn Products,Stratos,Xceed
others not recovered that I had but got out from under
Cel-Sci, Superconductor, Vertical Computer Systems, Motion DNA,
GloebeTel
Anything else??
I can't understand why some folks won't take what I said at face value? I have been a member of this community here for going on 7 years and my credibillity comes into question because I posted against what was the common thinking? Never mind that it was my own personal experience from which I was drawing my conclusions, and not from some cut and pasted article, even though I did post some artcles that I found that backed up my position. Those were the first ones that I came across and after searching 2 or three pages of results bascially saying the same thing, I stopped looking any further. The only good thing about those experiences was that there was not large sums of money involved and that most of those positions were taken with monies I had made from selling off other stocks, never all the profits only a portion of the houses money. I just thought I would add a little of my personal experience to that discussion. I hope this explanation satisfies all that you were looking for Unclever.
Dave
Lenovo reports 5 mln USD quarterly net profit
http://english.people.com.cn/200608/04/eng20060804_289763.html
The Chinese mainland personal computer (PC) giant Lenovo Group announced Thursday that its profit attributable to shareholders was 5 million U.S. dollars in the first fiscal quarter ending on June 30, 2006.
Yang Yuanqing, Lenovo's chairman, said at a press conference on Thursday that consolidated revenue increased 38 percent year-on- year to 3.5 billion U.S. dollars for the first quarter.
He said that during the same period, Lenovo's world wide PC shipments grew more than 12 percent year-on-year, ahead of the industry average of 9 percent.
Yang said, "Lenovo delivered solid results in the first quarter, meeting our expectations and those of our board", adding the key advantages of Lenovo include the group's well-positioning in high- growth areas and having a very clear strategic focus on PC business.
William J. Amelio, Lenovo's president and chief executive officer, said "we are encouraged by the progress we are making in transforming the company while at the same time, growing market share and maintaining our overall profit margin in a highly competitive market. "
He said "we still have much to do and we are moving swiftly and aggressively to take the necessary steps to make Lenovo a truly world class competitor."
He said, the group is to deploy its transaction model more deeply and broadly in markets outside of China, and to enhance short and long term performance of the group's global supply chain.
Amelio added that Lenovo is to grow its desktop business by leveraging ability to differentiate through innovation and to continue the group's cost-reduction efforts.
With acquisition of the former IBM Personal Computing Division, Lenovo develops, manufactures and markets reliable high-quality, secure and easy-to-use technology products and services worldwide, said Yang Yuanqing.
Source: Xinhua
I believe there was an 8-k released a few days after the RS took effect.
Dave
This was a great quarter.
Rev was much greater than I expected, which I thought would be in the 675K range-BTW would have been a great % move up from Q1 and far better than Q2 of 05. Many folks can try and spin this how ever they see fit. People will drive the fact that this company has been around for 18 years, no revenue, lawsuits, mis management, blah blah blah, we could go on. And we won't. The past is the past and it's time to move on.
Wave is selling- we have revenues so we are selling- a product that the marketplace wants, and sees the need for. This is not some boutique item, or some product line that will be scrapped in 12 months so they can move on to the next market changing thing. Wave has had 5 quarters in a row of revenue growth. I've seen posts elsewhere that say this is a disappointment. 5 quarters of rev growth cannot be considered a disappointment, and should be considered a milestone when you look at the track record. Insignificant? I wish I was smoking stuff that mind altering when I was imbibing in my storied youth.
Wave has surpassed all of last years revs with this quarter. Wave is south of 40K of passing the combined revenues for all of 03,04,05. How is that insignificant? You can't have it both ways. The arguement that the company sucks, but the revs should have been better?? That dung won't fly anymore. How can 910K be insignificant. I see it as very significant. How? The way I see it is this revenue gives this company and it's long time shareholders some real tangible idea of where this thing is headed. The one thing I keep tossing around is this and has been since the numbers came out- and this was also something I have seen been blasted. Wave got the 910 in rev and we still did not get a breakdown of the who sold what to whom and so on. We have not seen DELL, Intel, Gateway, STM, ATmel etc, NOT ONE of these OEM's have released a PR explaining how much these new products have added to their bottom line, not one. Yet somehow the sales these compnaies have generated earned Wave 910K in rev. When the day comes where the sales warrant a release by these companies, or we move past the point that SKS feels he can release these numbers after the market get's established what will the rev numbers look like then? 910K without a publicly released PO with hard numbers attached. What happens when it starts selling itself?? Despite everything this turned out to be a great quarter.
Dave
After Hours 2.45 +0.40
A Trusted Platform Module (TPM) chip is required on the motherboard or USB flash memory device to support BitLocker
You can't hammer this home enough..........
Vista Security Mostly Invisible But Thorough
By Andy Patrizio
http://www.internetnews.com/security/article.php/3624331
A common knock on Vista has been that it's just Windows XP with a prettier face. But under the hood, Microsoft has made a mighty effort to secure the platform. Now the software giant is seeking help in an unusual forum:the Black Hat conference.
Black Hat isn't quite as outlaw as its name implies. Defcon, which follows the show this weekend, is much more of an anything-goes event. Black Hat founder Jeff Moss started the show in 1997 to provide education to security professionals, and expose flaws in software.
That's why Microsoft (Quote, Chart) is there. The company has attended prior Black Hat shows, but this year will see a first for the company: it's devoting an entire track to security in Windows Vista and Internet Explorer 7. Microsoft is signed on as a "Platinum Sponsor" of the event, along with Cisco Systems (Quote, Chart) and Ernst & Young, an IT consultancy.
"One of the key benefits of presenting at Black Hat is that Windows Vista is still a product in development," said a Microsoft spokesperson in a statement to internetnews.com. "While Trustworthy Computing has already significantly improved code quality and provided customers with better defense in depth, we believe that no matter how few security vulnerabilities remain, security researchers will have a hand in helping customers stay ahead of contemporary security threats."
Trustworthy Computing is Microsoft's fancy name for public beta testing of its security products. Since 2002, Microsoft products have been readily available to customers in very early form, often through monthly releases called Community Technology Previews. The company has encouraged constant feedback throughout the development cycle.
Vista has been no different. There have been two public betas, the second coming in June. Microsoft has certainly gotten a lot of help. The Vista blogging site Longhorn Blogs alone reported 28,000 bugs within one month of Vista's release, and 20,000 were fixed.
So will the Black Hat crowd prove as helpful?
"It never hurts to talk to people, even if they're mostly on the other side," said Rob Helm, director of research for Directions on Microsoft. "Black Hat, despite the name, isn't uniformly people who break security for amusement purposes. There are legitimate security consultants there."
Jonathan Hassell, a security consultant and author of Hardening Windows, a well-regarded book on Windows security, said Microsoft's appearance at the conference shows the company wants to be taken seriously when it comes to Vista security.
"Microsoft has traditionally welcomed its products being tested by the types of people who attend Black Hat; now they’re taking it a step further," said Hassell. "They really believe they’ve crossed a threshold of integrity and reliability with their suite of Vista security technologies and they are ready to trumpet it loudly."
Hassell said that on paper Vista's security looks good, but in practice "it may be too intrusive. It’s a mixed bag. I’ve been very critical of several decisions, both regarding security and usability. I think Vista is a few steps forward in the interminable attack against All Things Insecure."
A Lot Under The Hood
Microsoft has good reason to seek as much help as possible. There is a lot new with Vista, some of it evolutionary carryover from Windows XP and some of it entirely new.
Vista is the first operating system built from the ground up using the Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) model. SDL is a process of secure design, coding, testing, review and response designed to remove vulnerabilities and minimize exposure to attacks.
One reason why malware (define) has been able to run rampant on Windows XP machines is because every user runs in Administrator mode.
If you ran Windows XP in anything less than Administrator mode, you often were unable to do the simplest of things, like change time on the clock or add a printer.
To remedy this, Microsoft introduced the User Account Control (UAC) feature, which is designed to add some layers of protection and functionality lacking in XP's all-or-nothing security.
UAC is designed to allow the user to run outside of Administrator mode and still be able to change settings or install new software. If the user attempts to perform a task that requires administrative access, such as installing a new application or modifying system settings, they are prompted for an administrator password.
This is done because malware often makes changes to the operating system and computer settings without the user knowing it. MacOS and Linux both have similar security measures.
On a network level, Microsoft is adding Network Access Protection (NAP), which will allow network administrators to block computers that don't comply with "health policies" as they have defined them. That could mean patch levels or running an antivirus program.
The Root Of The Problem
The advent of rootkits (define) has only upped the ante in the malware battle, as rootkits are much harder to detect. To block rootkits, Microsoft has a two-pronged approach. The first is Windows Defender, currently in beta 2 but due with Vista. Defender will be available for Windows XP.
Defender monitors components of the operating system commonly abused by malware, such as the Startup folder and registry keys. Like UAC, if an application attempts to make a change to a protected area of the operating system, Windows Defender prompts the user to either allow or reject the change.
The second part of that solution is for the 64-bit version of Vista only. The 64-bit version of Vista supports a kernel patch protection technology known as PatchGuard, which prevents unauthorized software from modifying the Windows kernel. Kernel-mode drivers cannot extend or replace operating system kernel services with this feature.
Enlisting Hardware Help
One of the most common tricks by virus writers to take control of the system is a buffer overrun. Microsoft insists that the SDL development process will help minimize buffer overruns, but it's not stopping there.
CPU vendors AMD and Intel have added the NX feature, or No Execute. NX enables software to designate specific portions of memory for data, so code can't execute in that space, which is how buffer overflow viruses work.
There's another measure of security more geared at data protection than malware. Vista will use BitLocker full disk encryption, so data is encrypted as it's written to disc. That way, if data is lost or stolen, it cannot be accessed without a recovery key.
A Trusted Platform Module (TPM) chip is required on the motherboard or USB flash memory device to support BitLocker
If we do 3M next quarter.............
I will be calling Kimberley-Clark to give a personal testimony as to the quality of their "Depends" product line.
Dave
In reality it's not early..........
from the Wave website
August 9, 2005
Wave Systems Reports Q2 Results and Reviews Growing Momentum of the Trusted Computing Marketplac
August 12, 2004
Wave Systems Provides Corporate Update and Reviews Q2 2004 Results
Aug 14 2003- Wave Systems Reports Q2/First Half Results and Highlights Increased Market Momentum.... more
August 08 2002- Wave Systems Reports Q2 Results and Recent Developments ... more
August 7 2001- Wave Systems Reports Q2 Results and Recent Developments more
August 10 2000- Wave Systems Q2 Results and Progress Report more
Aug 10 1999- Wave Systems Reports Second Quarter Results and Highlights Recent Progress more
August 18 1998- Wave Systems Reports Second Quarter And Six Months Results more
August 20 1997- Wave Systems Corp. Reports Second Quarter And Six Months Results more
To me it seems they are pretty much in the same time frame as all these prior years.
That being said, I think this makes a really strong statement by the company. We are all in agreement that this is probably the most important quarter for Wave to date. When you factor in the fresh RS and that Wave is dealing with the Nas compliance as it trades for 5 days, including today, this has to be seen as 1 of 2 things-bullish or bullheaded.
I tend to lay hope in the bullish corner. They could have stretched out the Q2 til the last possible minute, which as time went forward would have been interpreted as a very bad sign, but the stock would have most likely satisfied the Nas requirement. Bullheaded would be releasing a so so or below expected revs- which I think would have to be south 0f 500K at this juncture- and then trying to get a bump out of some news or 8-k going into the conference on the 7th. This is on the fly as i type this and I personally don't believe the second scenario is plausable only because a lower than expected earnings will almost certainly drop the price through the 1.38 level. At least I hope not.
FWIW I think we see revs in the 685K range give or take 20K either side.
Back to hibernating from the heat with some more coffee and Velvet Underground on the Hi-Fi!
Dave
Barge I will not be led lockstep and smiling to the promised land. I see myself being dragged, stuffed into a satchel being pelted with empty Miwaukee's Best cans to the "I told you so" chorale.
Dave
My point is that everybody here seems to think there is nothing wrong with a reverse split, just another day at the office. There are no buyers or sellers to be had. How many folks still have shares tied up at the brokers that they might be selling if they could?? These days right here and now, without news and with the flow of shares restricted, seemingly, are the time this stock needs to make hay and distance itself from the 1.38 mark. Everyday that goes by between now and the 8th without any news of substance threatens the viability to continue being listed on the NAS. Truthfully what has changed besides the ticker symbol to the rest of the investing community? Nothing. I love the tech and believe in the tech and could have printed enough articles out to paper train all the dogs in North America screaming out the need for Wave, but none of that is going to mean squat if the stock does not gain legs here. We can bitch about the bashers and the naysayers and everything else that comes along with it. RS Bad/RS Good longs, shorts etc.... These next 8 trading days make or break this company. The bottom line IS the stock price now.
Dave
DRM is this a good example of what you were talking about?
Posted by: cmf
In reply to: Snackman who wrote msg# 118256 Date:4/25/2006 6:37:39 PM
Post #of 126601
A reverse split is much more likely.
Time to face reality.
Sorry.
Posted by: Snackman
In reply to: cmf who wrote msg# 118258 Date:4/25/2006 7:28:59 PM
Post #of 126600
CmF, It will not happen at this price level. You can absolutely trust me on this one 100%.
open high low close vol.
25-Apr-06 0.90 0.90 0.76 0.80 445,700
Thanks,
Dave
The wretched truth about reverse stock splits
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P32972.asp
These desperation moves -- bundling shares for sale at a higher price -- rarely lift faltering stocks for long. Odds are better for short-sellers. Here’s what to keep in mind.
By Michael Brush
In a last-ditch effort to cling to their listings on the major stock exchanges, many companies such as Lucent Technologies (LU, news, msgs) may be resorting to the market’s version of the Hail Mary pass in coming months.
Pay attention, because these desperation plays, known as reverse stock splits, can signal sharp declines ahead that could wipe out a good part of your wealth.
A reverse split is simply a maneuver to get a stock up above $1 and thus free of the danger zone that gets companies booted off an exchange. Managers typically cobble together as many shares as it takes to get one share worth more than $5 to win their reprieve.
Though the intentions seem sound, it’s better to look at a reverse split as a flashing red light warning that you may need to kick a stock out of your portfolio. As many as 75% of all stocks wind up trading lower after a reverse split.
Investors who failed to sell shares in several reverse splits in just the past few months have seen their holdings get hit by 60% or more in no time, despite the overall market strength.
Big losses
Internet-strategy consulting firm Razorfish (RAZF, news, msgs) narrowly clung to its Nasdaq listing with a 1-for-30 reverse split last July. The move readjusted its share price up to about $5 from less than 20 cents. Since then, the stock has drifted down 67% to $1.69. Click Commerce (CKCM, news, msgs) lost 63% in the three weeks following its reverse split in early September, trading down to $1 from around $2.75. Likewise, Holiday RV Superstores (RVEE, news, msgs) shed around 67% to trade under $1 from about $2.75 less than two months after its early August reverse split.
Other companies recently launching reverse splits -- or mulling them – include AT&T (T, news, msgs) and many of the other former high-fliers trying to repair the damage suffered since the market bubble burst. Palm (PALMD, news, msgs) and fiber-optic component maker Stratos Lightwave (STLWD, news, msgs) have recently resorted to reverse splits. So have Internet software providers Commerce One (CMRC, news, msgs), Verticalnet (VERT, news, msgs) and Docent (DCNTD, news, msgs).
Some companies using reverse splits will survive and prosper, of course. But on average, shorting them can bring gains of up to 37%. That’s how much, on average, stocks tend to decline by three years after a reverse split, according to academic studies. (Investors short stocks by borrowing shares, selling them and replacing them later at a lower price.) A good portion of that decline often happens in the first few months.
Smaller companies -- or those under $500 million in market capitalization -- tend to do the worst. On average, they fall up to 44% three years after the reverse split, says Crocker Coulson, of the investor relations firm Coffin Communications Group. Reverse splits are harder on Nasdaq companies than those listed on other exchanges.
The reverse split jinx
Why do stocks usually sink after reverse splits? The answer is simple. “A stock isn’t trading under a dollar unless it is pretty close to bankruptcy or it has some other serious troubles,” says Charles Jones, who teaches finance at Columbia Business School. “And that is not changed by a reverse split.”
Put another way, reverse splits are like a message from management that the underlying business trends are so rotten, they won’t be enough to get the stock price up to snuff.
To be sure, companies cite lots of good reasons to do reverse splits, beyond the need to meet listing requirements. Many fund managers shun stocks under $5 because they appear too speculative. Investors can’t use margin to buy stocks under $5. And Wall Street brokerages are reluctant to push stocks down in this trading range. All of these factors limit demand.
What’s more, a lot of companies simply have too much stock outstanding after the excesses of the market bubble days when they created huge numbers of shares to support stock option bonanzas and pointless acquisitions. “We are still recovering from the great binge of the late 1990s,” says Coulson.
The pitfalls of shorting reverse splits
Even though 75% of reverse splits end up declining, it is not as easy making money shorting them as you might think. “The 25% that go up can go up so much they wipe you out,” says Andrew Lo, a finance professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management.
For example, j2 Global Communications (JCOM, news, msgs), which provides messaging services, shot up an impressive 800% to more than $27 recently. Its reverse split came just 18 months ago. With that kind of risk to shorting these stocks in mind, here are the key investing rules to keep in mind.
Avoid shorting companies whose prospects improved around the time of the reverse split. Interstate Hotels and Resorts (IHR, news, msgs), a small Washington, D.C.-based hotel management company, slipped to $2.50 per share from $3.40 immediately after it announced a 1-for-5 reverse split at the beginning of August. Anyone who stayed short through that reverse split would have gotten crushed by now, however. The stock has moved up 60% to around $4 per share recently, in part because of moves to cut costs and improve financial strength following a merger, says John Emery, the president of the company.
You also have to consider the fundamentals for a company’s sector, of course. Lucent, which is asking shareholders for permission to do a reverse split because its shares are hovering dangerously close to the $1 mark, believes it will be profitable next year. But if overcapacity and weak demand for telecom equipment continue to plague the sector, Lucent shares will be a good short if it goes through with a reverse split that would take shares back up above $15.
Avoid shorting the reverse split stocks with decent financial strength. Ethyl (EY, news, msgs), a small Richmond, Va., producer of fuel additives and lubricants, might have appeared to be a good short candidate after it did a reverse stock split at the end of June. But a closer look would have revealed good enough cash flow to survive -- despite high debt levels that were troubling investors.
Sure enough, Ethyl -- which has no coverage by Wall Street analysts -- recently tacked on a short-killing 50% when it announced good quarterly results. “Most of the penny stocks that do reverse splits have cash flow problems,” says David Fiorenza, finance chief for the company. “But we make stuff and sell stuff and we have good cash flow.” The company is also around 30% owned by insiders, another sign of strength to watch for.
Avoid shorting companies doing a reverse split for appearances. After AT&T spins out its broadband business to Comcast (CMCSK, news, msgs) in the days ahead, the phone company’s shares will trade in the $5 to $7 range. That’s not low enough to get kicked off the New York Stock Exchange. But it seems too low a price for a company with $40 billion in annual revenue. That’s one reason AT&T plans to do a 1-for-5 reverse split to move its shares into the upper $20 range.
Other tips
Remember that reverse stock splits that don’t take a company’s shares above $5 may be difficult to short, because it’s often hard to short stocks below $5. Most reverse splits, however, do move shares back above $5. Typically the less dramatic reverse splits -- like a 1-for-2 swap -- don’t suffer as much. If you are hunting for reverse splits to short, look for cases where massive changes are needed to get a stock up to a respectable price level, like Palm’s conversion of 20 shares into one share.
Despite some exceptions, the bottom line is that most reverse splits spell trouble because they’re simply cosmetic changes that do nothing to reverse ugly trends at a company. Perhaps Yogi Berra put it best. When asked once how he wanted his pizza cut, he quipped: "You'd better make it four. I don't think I can eat six pieces."
Reverse splits aren't always reversals of fortune
By Dawn Kawamoto
http://news.com.com/Reverse+splits+arent+always+reversals+of+fortune/2100-1017_3-248744.html
Investors in battered technology shares have a new term to learn: the reverse stock split.
While investors spent much of last year tabulating triple-digit percentage gains on numerous tech stocks, this year has provided a sobering lesson in the unique problems faced by stocks that slip below $5 or are even delisted from major exchanges.
Now, along comes the reverse split, a mechanism that is increasingly being used to prop up tech shares--at least temporarily--that are languishing at gumball-machine prices. Last month, for example, PlanetRx announced its intention to conduct a 1-for-8 reverse split.
Under a normal stock split, investors typically receive two shares for each share they hold, and the price is cut in half. For example, a person holding a stock worth $80 receives two shares of the same stock, but the price is cut to $40.
With a reverse split, the investor may receive just one share for each 10 shares held, but the price is multiplied 10-fold. For example, a person with 1,000 shares of a 10-cent stock would end up with 100 shares of a $1 stock.
Reverse splits are typically used to keep a stock price at a high enough level, such as $1, that the shares are not booted off the Nasdaq. However, in many cases the higher price proves to be temporary as the shares once again slip into penny-stock status.
According to the Nasdaq, 32 stocks this year--10 of which are tech companies--have gone through reverse splits. However, 22 percent of those stocks have slipped back below $1 and into penny-stock status, including that of online marketing company PopMail.com.
In August, PopMail's stock dipped below the $1 mark. To get its stock price above the $1 mark, the company announced plans to conduct a 1-for-10 reverse stock split.
PopMail's stock, which had closed at 34 cents Oct. 11, suddenly became a $3.40 stock the following day when the split took effect. The company's shareholders, meanwhile, received one share for every 10 shares they previously owned.
But just 15 days later, PopMail's stock was again under the $1 mark, where it remains.
"Since it's done for purely cosmetic reasons and doesn't change a company's finances, the market knows it and the company gets penalized. Most companies end up seeing their stock prices continue to slide," said Pamela Peterson, a finance professor at Florida State University and co-author of a 1992 research report, "A further understanding of stock distribution: The case of reverse stock splits."
Jon Johnson, editor of Texas-based newsletter StockSplits.net, agreed.
"Reverse splits have a negative stigma. A lot of investors we talk to don't have a lot of confidence in a company that gets its stock up through a reverse split. They think the company is playing games and trying to get credit for something they don't deserve," Johnson said.
What's the motive?
But for most companies in the current climate, a reverse split is conducted out of a need to remain listed on an exchange, rather than solely to prop up the share price.
Companies that find their share prices fall below $5 or $1, depending on the particular Nasdaq category they fall into, receive a notice from the exchange that if their stock remains at that level for 30 days they risk being delisted, said Nasdaq spokesman Wayne Lee.
If the shares remain at the depressed level for 30 days, a new clock starts ticking. At this point, companies have 90 days to get the price above the threshold for 10 consecutive trading days to come into compliance, he noted.
Splitsville
Ten Nasdaq-listed tech companies initiated reverse stock splits this year out of 32 companies that took such measures.
Company Reverse split ratio
Clariti Telecommunications 1-for-4
eGlobe 1-for-4.7
GSV 1-for-5
Infogrames 1-for-5
Liberty Livewire 1-for-2.5
Musicmaker.com 1-for-10
On-Point Technology Systems 1-for-3
PacificNet.com 1-for-3
PopMail.com 1-for-10
Wire One Technologies 1-for-2
Source: Nasdaq and FactSet Universal
Shares that are delisted typically move to the over-the-counter market, a market that is less liquid because it is more difficult to match buyers and sellers.
The Nasdaq allows companies to initiate numerous reverse splits, but it's a double-edged sword. While a stock price goes up following a reverse split, the number of shares outstanding contracts.
Many institutional investors, for example, shun companies with fewer than 10 million shares floating in the public market, said Greg Vogel, an analyst with Banc of America Securities.
And if a company's Nasdaq float drops below 1.1 million, or 750,000, depending on the category the company falls under, it also may be delisted, Lee said.
For these reasons, many companies do not seek a reverse split.
"It's hard to make a case in doing a reverse split, unless you can argue there should be some reason for someone to buy the stock," said Tom McManus, equity portfolio strategist for Banc of America Securities.
He added some companies may opt to avoid the effort if it appears they'll be closing their doors soon or landing a buyer, as was the case this week with Garden.com.
Some companies, however, take the plunge anyway.
Risking it
CareMatrix, a retirement home operator, conducted a 1-for-18 reverse split in September. Two months later, the company filed for bankruptcy protection.
"My impression is reverse splits are a strategy of last resort," said Neal Macneale, editor of the 2-for-1 Stock Split newsletter in Menlo Park, Calif.
Although the markets this year pushed more than 30 Nasdaq-listed companies to seek a reverse split, it's surprisingly fewer than the number last year, when 81 companies filed for reverse splits, Lee said.
"1998, for all intents and purposes, was a recession year for a number of industries. And through 1999, a lot of companies continued to suffer, even though the Nasdaq did well," McManus said. "The Nasdaq did well because there was a surge in tech spending and it was concentrated in relatively few companies. Without the largest companies, the stock market returns would have been poor last year."
24601............
This may be true, however I have found that in most cases actual experience is far more valuable than having to search and find something or someone to validate it. Seems to have a little more of a lasting impact that way, don't you think?
Dave
AWK, you may not like the OTC or pink sheets comment but the reality is that if Wave has a disappointing 2nd Q with a PP on either side of that report that is where they will be asap. You are goingprobably going to have the usual profit taking by the PP folks, why would they hang on if the numbers are only marginally better than expected. They can get them on the cheap again next time. I also think that a bad Q following the RS will be the last straw for many here and this will also put pressure on this stock like we have never seen before. Wave needs a PR with Revs. attached no question with a positive quarter like no other time in this companies history.
Dave
Awk, his comments basically reflect the reality of this situation. The fact is that for every 3 or 4 that make it, you can find 96 that fail. I have had this misfortune of owning 6 stocks that did RS and every one of them disappeared off the radar, every one. The only good thing was that I had very minimal positions in these companies at the time the went bust.
Dave
We closed at $2.00 yesterday.
I will be curious to see if the institutional reported #'s will reflect the buying in of these folks over the next few months. We got the 2.00 that folks were looking for. The volume has certainly not reflected that this was happening even on a small scale.
Dave
Wildman...........
Lemmy is a personal friend of mine, a long time investor/trader whom follows his own due dilligence and not that of message boards and financial gurus. He has never gone onto a message board to pump or dump or bash, he just calls it like his experience has seen it. Also one of the most knowledgeable, level headed people I have ever had the pleasure of meeting in my life time. I don't want to speak for him, but from the conversations we have had his style is basically in it to make money on how the stock performs. Cold and analytic yes, cut and dried. Cut your losses early. Lemmy has been a buyer and seller of this stock as well.
By that criteria, this stock has been at the top of the dung heap. Just when it seems as if the revs will start flowing we get hit with a RS a 2ndQ that nobody knows where the numbers will come in and an impending PP. Any financial pro would have to say this stock has been an abject failure and continue to be amazed by the companies ability to continue to raise funds. Me I still believe in the tech, that why I stay till the bitter end.
Dave
Vacation... the 1st 10K went through at 1.55.
Dave
93 on the bid, 5 on the ask on Scottrade realtime. eom
I see the Yahoo baord has died with the old ticker symbol.. bet they didn't see that coming............
Fortinet Named One of the Ten Most Influential Security Companies
Monday July 24, 6:07 pm ET
Computer Business Review Recognizes Fortinet for Its Market Innovation, Leadership and Influence
SUNNYVALE, CA--(MARKET WIRE)--Jul 24, 2006 -- Fortinet -- the pioneer and leading provider of multi-threat security solutions -- today announced it has been named one of the Ten Most Influential Security Companies in a special report issued last week by Computer Business Review, a leading publication in the United States and the United Kingdom. Fortinet is the only private company on this list, which includes industry giants like Microsoft, Cisco, Symantec, and others.
ADVERTISEMENT
For its annual Ten Most Influential special reports, Computer Business Review's editorial staff considers a company's market influence, revenue, profitability as key selection criteria. Chosen companies are believed to command a newfound level of influence -- causing other vendors to follow suit -- or have broadened their portfolios and stretched their innovation to address emerging market needs.
The report notes Fortinet's impressive growth, as well as its innovation and influence in the Unified Threat Management (UTM) market: "Fortinet is a rare beast, a private security company barely into its sixth year that is already the category leader in a rapidly growing market, where it competes against companies much better known than itself [sic]...Virtually every company that sells a firewall now also sells a UTM device, a testament to Fortinet's ability to very early identify a market where there is real demand."
Recognizing the need for high-performance integrated security to protect against an array of blended threats, Fortinet introduced the industry's first multi-threat security appliances in 2002. Since then, the company has expanded its solutions portfolio to include an array of new security systems and services, and propelled itself to become one of the largest and fastest-growing private security companies in history. To date, approximately 150,000 Fortinet appliances have shipped to more than 20,000 enterprises, universities, service providers and telecommunications carriers worldwide.
Computer Business Review's Ten Most Influential Security Companies article can be viewed at: http://www.cbronline.com/article_cbr.asp?guid=7D792053-714E-4633-AE98-CCB7C7ED7281
About Fortinet (www.fortinet.com)
Fortinet is the pioneer and leading provider of ASIC-accelerated multi-threat security systems, which are used by enterprises and service providers to increase their security while reducing total operating costs. Fortinet solutions were built from the ground up to integrate multiple levels of security protection -- including firewall, antivirus, intrusion prevention, VPN, spyware prevention and antispam -- providing customers a way to protect multiple threats as well as blended threats. Leveraging a custom ASIC and unified interface, Fortinet solutions offer advanced security functionality that scales from remote office to chassis-based solutions with integrated management and reporting. Fortinet solutions have won multiple awards around the world and are the only security products that are certified eight times over by the ICSA (firewall, antivirus, IPSec, SSL, IDS, client antivirus detection, cleaning and antispyware). Fortinet is privately held and based in Sunnyvale, California.
Contact:
Media Contacts:
Jennifer Leggio
Fortinet, Inc.
+1 408 486 7876
jleggio@fortinet.com
Michelle Spolver
Fortinet, Inc.
+1 408 486 7837
mspolver@fortinet.com
The only way this is good is if Wave can sustain it's price after the RS. Should it fall back to this level after the RS that 30M price I suggested also get quartered to 12.5M. The bottom line is and it is apparent to all, this company needs execution to happen pretty rapidly, or it will be the market forces that dictates wether this company soars or twists in the wind, regardless of what position they hold in the TCG. The damn shame of all this is that I think they are going to have to keep going to the AS. As far as I can tell there hasn't been a whole lot of these shares that have been held on to. If these buyers keep turning around and selling after locking in a profit without any rev. numbers being released than this can only continue driving the price down, making the subsequent PP's come in lower and lower. I believe that if they did do a PP before Q2 release this bodes very badly. The only thing IMO that can save this company after that would be some early positive Q3 #'s or a Govt. contract win. Anything short of this and the shareprice gets slaughtered. Just as the price goes up with a RS I think the price can also fall just a fast with fewer shares out there to stop a free fall.
Dave
Snack Wave might be in the strongest position it has ever been in.............
That being said, it has done nothing for the share price. As this thing moves forward, the shareprice needs to move with it. Having those companies on board makes all the difference in the world. Having these companies along and the market not developing with them makes all the difference in the world as well. The longer this thing takes to move forward means to me the more shares that have to moved off the shelf. Just look at the action the last week or so. Without any cash money announcement this thing in no way will sustain a price high enough to maintain the Naz listing. The danger here is that the longer this thing plays out the more unfavorable terms the shares on the AS will have to be moved. For example, look at what the last PP shares went for-at the market- and we are talking about a discount for a PP that may or may not have gone down. If it hasn't it may go down for less than the number tossed around yesterday. And that is coming after the long awaited NTT deal. I agree that a PP placed before the Q2 results bears a bad number coming in. Why try and do it if the #'s were less than expected, or at the very minimum less than a 10% inmcrease over Q1. The other problem Wave faces IMO is that a staggering of the stock to get to the finish line also means time for some of these other companies to catch on to the magnatude of the infrastructure Wave has been laying down the past few years. If the stagger continues we might see some company picking up shares on the cheap. With a probable 1:4 coming down the line this also means the % drops for such a compnay to take a majority position of Wave. One thing we can all agree on here is that if the shares continue to trade where they are now for an extended period of months there will certainly be a company that will realize the value of the tech, products and supply lines will be worth far more than where the stock is trading now. I would think that the intrinsic value of this company is worth more than the 29-30M it would take to grab a majority stake in this company if was was able to acquire the needed shares.
Dave
Cosmo, other things at work here contributing to the price drop IMO is you probably have a group of longs lightening up on their positions. I also can't imagine any new money coming in here-only steadfast longs and shorts. There to me seems to be no external buying coming in-and frankly, why should there be. Add the impending RS coming down where the ratio has still not been cast, but we can see from the price now it can't be anything other than a 1-4, and with no guarantee this will fulfill the requirement to stay listed. This is not even taking into the consideration the AS number. Anything outside of a release with real dollars attached will not help at this point- just look at the last 2 PR's that came down.
Frankly speaking, I think this is the first time that many off the long time shareholders are faced with the cold reality that their cash is disappearing. When you look at some of the posts and pull back the expectations for what we hope this company will become, there are a lot of folks staring at some serious monetary losses directly. If I had positions as large as some here I could hardly blame them for pulling some of it off the table. When you strip away all the DD that has been done here, which many time has been ahead of the curve, it hasn't translated to the shareholders bottom line. The guidance from Lee has been fuzzy at best. And this company is beyond the stage of design wins helping boost the share price, ala Intel back in the day. Until this company can attached solid tangible numbers to their name and not set breakeven quarters that get pushed back, there is no reason to think this price recovers. And that also gives no reason to not pull any off the table for those squirming as this moves forward.
Dave