Dory,

at $15 a seat for annual maintenance, the continuing fees are about $1.2mm. As for replacement pc's, my understanding is that licenses are transferrable within an enterprise. So no new license fees for an old pc that is retired in favor of a new one.
(I would love to be wrong on this.)

awk, reading between

the lines, I noticed this sentence:

In Oct 2010 I was seconded back to Digital Security to lead a program to implement hardware and removable media encryption across 80,000 pc’s.

That was about the time of the lost laptop at BP. JT was seconded back to security to fix the problem and the result, as we now all know for certain, was that BP implemented Wave's suite of products.

Further, JT was so impressed with the solution that he left a 22 year BP career to go with Wave. That someone who is profoundly involved in implementing state of the art security should choose to join Wave speaks loudly about the strength and opportunities in Wave's business. This is first degree confirmation that easily trumps any tertiary and dated IT views that are sometimes seen.

internet, I'm hoping

that day may come in the next two weeks. The details of the Army sole provider contract could be an eye opener for many, should they be released in the near future. Add to that any MSFT Win8 news and RSA conference developments and Wave's earning's profile could become much more visible.

Some art for

Wave to consider for it's corporate walls:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/85808588/

Some linked devices

of the future according to Corning, a very cool youtube video.

I wonder who will secure all of these devices? 90 day passwords seem so inadequate when one considers the network world that is soon to be upon us.

jermart, what makes you say that Safend had

a value of zero?. Safend was a private company without listed shares. So clearly there wasn't a listed share price of value zero
I think yuou are mistaken that the entire world valued Safend at zero.

alladinador, the first Dabears post

says there are 1,000 pc's per brigade. So how many brigades are included in this? I couldn't even guess.

I think this will be the last


"small business" award that Wave gets! This is the start of something big!

mundo, the Beta release for Windows 8

will be very interesting because it should offer the first glimpse into any role that Wave may be playing in the consumer and enterprise versions of Win8. This will be a revelation to many in the IT industry. It will also be interesting to see how Wave modifies their interface to make it user friendly for consumers who are focused on only a single pc.

boom, there

always seems to be an extra 100,000 shares trading on the close these days, so the volume will add up by the end of the day.

The reason we're moving is because APPL blew out expecations to the upside. Investors realize that Wave and APPL are close and expect Wave to do the same.

(That last part is a bit of humour for Titlewave. I don't know why we're inching up.)

oknpv / the long

who loses his vote is the one who is on margin. When you enter into a margin agreement with your broker you agree that your broker can lend any shares in your margin account when your account is in a cash borrowing position. Part of the lending agreement states that you will lose your voting status on any shares that are lent out on the day of the vote.

Essentially, if you borrow cash against your shares, you are not entitled to a vote.

Amsterdam66, point number 9

is interesting:


9. Security breach notification
There is a new mandatory requirement to notify data protection authorities and individuals within 24 hours of a data security breach. However, the requirement to notify individuals does not apply where the data was encrypted.

jermart, you

clearly referenced something called "rev". Revenues are different then earnings, which you are now referencing in this latest post.

As you spoke about increased staffing, which clearly references increased costs, then "rev" should include any increased revenues arising from the business activities of Safend that offset those expenses. That's the way accounting is done.

Also, no one outside of Wave knows how revenues from other business lines grew in Q4. So your statement of "no rev. increase" cannot be a statement of fact, but rather must be something else.

jermart, there are rev increases associated

with the purchase of Safend, not just added staff as you wrote. I am surprised that you failed to mention that fact. Nonetheless, your statement of "no rev. increase" is clearly wrong.

Doma,

and just because information is contained in a secure state does not mean that information is true.

jermart/ this is

an identity product that competes with the likes of RSA/ EMC.

What it does not do is

1.Manage TPMs
2.Manage SEDs
3.Provide end point operating system measurement and verification. (WEM)

So what Securekey does not do is compete with Wave in the same product space.

What it does do is increase consumer focus on security products.

What it may do, if Securekey makes use of TPMs, is create consumer demand for TPMs and thereby create consumer demand for Wave's ESC.

All good and positive for Wave

Roc66, try this link for

an estimate:


http://www.fiercemobilecontent.com/pages/gsma-connected-devices-sales-forecast

dig,

rules and enforcment of these has moved on:

The SEC has pursued certain PIPE investments (primarily involving hedge-funds) as violating U.S. federal securities laws. The controversy has largely involved hedge funds that use PIPE securities to "cover" shares that the fund "shorted" in anticipation of the PIPE offering. In these instances, the SEC has shown that the fund knew about the upcoming offering (in which it would be involved) prior to shorting shares.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_investment_in_public_equity

alea, this is a very big


battle for Wave to fight. For instance, the vast majority of the market value of Google is a result of it's ability to datamine users' queries and to thereby subject them to focused advertising. And Google has aspirations to go further, possibly as far as hard wiring people to machines, if one can believe the book I referenced earlier. Also, cookies are used to inform website providers of the identities of the users of the site. Turn off your cookies and see how many websites you can access. Not many. It is asking a lot of Wave to fight all of that. The most one could hope for would be an "opt-out" function using the anonymity functions of TC. It would then be left to the discretion of website providers to allow anonymous surfers to access their sites. But I wouldn't bet on this last step.

alea ,

just to clarify, "get over it" is the infamous Scott McNealy quotation.

aleajactaest, the truth about

privacy is likely much worse than you suggest. Read Chapter 11 and the Epiloque of The Big Switch by Nicholas Carr to get a sense of how much Google and the rest already know about you.

Given you have already have little privacy when it comes to the "good guys", the trade off is skewed in favour of using TPMs as a tool against the bad guys.

Privacy? "Get over it!"

aleajactaest, some of

your conclusions do not appear to have public evidence backing them up.

For instance, you write that What was said was that funding a venture for a long period after it was clear they were unable to discover a functional business model was reckless. How do you know for certain that there was a "long period" and that it was "reckless"? Also, do you the timing of the cash flows associated with WXP? The majority of the funds could have been spent in the early periods of the venture, not in prolonging it. You would need to be privy to all of the business possibilities and their time lines concerning WXP to say anything with certainty. Since I can reasonably expect you not to have such knowledge, I choose to conclude that you are equating lack of discipline with lack of success.

You also wrote: What they have said is they should have been disciplined about evaluating them. Here again I doubt you have full insider information concerning the process followed in evaluating and taking risks. You choose to assume they were undisciplined. I say we don't know.

You also brought up the issue of WXP induced dilution. Had WXP succeeded, then the story would not have been about dilution. Being willing to take a disciplined risk means also being willing to live with the negative outcomes. So while you say you are in favor of Wave taking business risks, you appear to be unwilling to accept the loss.

Concerning the pay structure of Wave management, the last time I raised the issue I was told by Dig that the pay levels were debateable but that the true irrationality was in paying employees with money rather than shares. So I addressed that. But as you are certain that pay and risk levels and interest alignments were incorrect, possibly you could give some statistical evidence that backs up your conclusions? Otherwise, what you write are only opinions(applies to me also). That's the place where I started with this topic with Dig.

Finally, let me reiterate that the above details are a speck in the horizon in comparision with the monumental achievement of being the definitive supplier of trusted computing technology.
The 99.9999999% trumps all else. That is the message, the rest is noise.

Ultimately we're all on the same team here even though we view some things differently. So let's look forward to success in 2012 for Wave and it's stakeholders.

aleajactaest, that a venture

fails or succeeds is not proof of a lack of discipline. Consider for example the revered Thomas Edison as a person that failed more often than he succeeded. Wave pursued 2 ventures related to their core business that failed. They took disiplined risks and they didn't pan out. Not a problem, I would have been more concerned if they had never taken any business risks.

But the point is Wave nailed 99.9999999% of what matters to their core business. They nailed trusted computing. No one else did. Wave said, we're going to do this and they did. So while the truth concerning the issues you raise may be debatable by reasonable people, the fact remains those side issues are moot. So in addition to forming a list of corporate undertakings and their success or failure, one also needs to weight the relative importance of those efforts to form a meaningful evaluation of the enterprise as a whole.

Concerning the detail of dilution of the firm through stock issuance, I suppose it would have been nice if the firm had cost nothing to run during it's development phase.I suppose that could have been achieved by everyone working without a salary in their living rooms at home. On pc's they bought themselves. But that isn't very realistic. Giving shares or options in lieu of cash also would have made no meaningful difference as the employees would have found it necessary to either barter or sell thier shares in order to buy food and shelter over the past decades.

So you can argue about the small stuff, but Wave getting trusted computing right trumps it all.

jermart, you left out the part from the NSM 10-k

for 1995, when Frankenberg was not a member of the board of directors. In it you will find Peter's complete retirement agreement with the consulting agreement details.



Exhibit 10.7

AGREEMENT




This Agreement is made and entered into as of May 17, 1995, by and
between National Semiconductor Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the
"Company") and Peter J. Sprague ("Sprague").

Recitals

Sprague has served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the
Company since 1965. Sprague now intends to retire as a member of the
Board of Directors and as Chairman of the Board.

In recognition of his many years of service as a member of the
Board of Directors and as Chairman, the Company wishes to compensate
Sprague in his retirement and to retain him as an independent consultant
to the Company.

Agreement

Now, therefore, it is agreed as follows:

1. Retirement: Sprague hereby resigns as a member of the Board
of Directors of the Company and as Chairman of the Board of Directors
immediately effective as of the date of this Agreement.

2. Compensation: In recognition of Sprague's many years of
service as a member of the Board of Directors of the Company and as
Chairman of the Board, the Company hereby agrees to the following
compensation for such retirement and for services rendered to the
Company as an independent consultant as provided in paragraph 4 hereof:
a. The Company shall pay to Sprague an annual amount of
$250,000, payable in equal monthly installments, for a period of
ten (10) years (the last payment to be made in May 2005).
b. The outstanding indebtedness (principal and interest) of
Sprague to the Company as a result of the loan made by the Company
to Sprague and evidenced by that certain Promissory Note dated
April 20, 1989, (the "Note"), with a balance currently outstanding
of approximately $450,000, is hereby canceled and forgiven and
deemed paid in full as of the date hereof.

c. To the extent that the forgiveness of the Note and the
outstanding balance thereunder as provided above, gives rise to
state and federal income tax, the Company agrees to make a payment
to Sprague in an amount sufficient to cover such tax on the
forgiveness as well as the resulting tax on such payment (the "Tax
Gross Up"). The Tax Gross Up shall be calculated in accordance
with the Company's standard practice and shall be paid by the
Company directly to Sprague within 30 days of the date of this
Agreement. The Company shall have no further obligation with
respect to taxes arising from forgiveness of the Note and the Tax
Gross Up, and payment of such taxes shall be solely the
responsibility of Sprague.
<PAGE>
d. As provided in paragraph 3 hereof, the Company shall grant
to Sprague an option to purchase 300,000 shares of the Company's
Common Stock at an exercise price per share equal to the opening
price of the Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the
date of grant (the "Option"). The date of grant of the Option
shall be the next business day following the date of execution of
this Agreement.

Except as provided by the Tax Gross Up, all compensation and
benefits (including the Option) to Sprague under this agreement shall be
reduced by all federal, state, local and other withholdings and similar
taxes and payments required by applicable law.

3. The Option. The Option shall be evidenced by an option
agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Option
Agreement"). The Option Agreement shall be executed simultaneously with
the execution of this Agreement. Among other things, the Option
Agreement provides for the following:

a. The Option shall be exercisable in installments to the
extent of 25% of the total number of shares subject to the Option
after each anniversary of the date of the Option Agreement.

b. The Option shall have a term of ten (10) years.

c. The Option and any shares of Common Stock purchased upon
exercise of the Option shall be acquired for investment and not
with a view towards distribution.

d. The Company shall use its reasonable efforts to register
the Option and the underlying shares of Common Stock on Form S-8 as
promptly as practicable, but only to the extent that Form S-8 is
available and the Option is eligible for such registration.

e. The Option shall be non-transferable by Sprague.

4. Consultant. During the term of the consulting arrangement
as set forth below, Sprague agrees to provide consulting services to the
Company upon the reasonable request of the Chief Executive Officer at
the Company, but at such places and times as shall be reasonably
convenient to Sprague in his sole discretion.

a. Sprague shall devote such of his business time and skill
to the revision of such services as shall, in his sole discretion,
be reasonably necessary.

b. Sprague agrees that the compensation provided by paragraph
2 and the Option provided by paragraph 3 above shall be the full
and complete compensation due and payable to Sprague for services
as such consultant.

c. The term of the consulting arrangement shall be from the
date hereof through May 5, 1999, or such later date as may be
agreed to in writing by the Company and Sprague.

d. During the term of the consulting arrangement, Sprague
shall be deemed to be an independent contractor and not an employee
or other representative or agent of the Company.

e. At all times during and after the term of the consulting
<PAGE>
arrangement, Sprague shall keep and treat as confidential all
information relating to the business or operations of the Company,
except information which is in the public domain or comes within
the public domain without any breach of this Consulting Agreement.

f. The consulting arrangement shall not limit or prohibit
Sprague from engaging in other business activities or services.

g. The Company shall have the right to terminate the
consulting arrangement with Sprague at any time after May 5, 1996,
upon written notice; provided, however, that any such termination
of the arrangement, for any reason whatsoever, shall not affect nor
diminish the Option nor the compensation to be paid by the Company
to Sprague as provided in this Agreement.

5. Representations of Sprague: Sprague hereby represents to
the Company as follows:

a. That he is acquiring the Option and the underlying shares
of Common Stock upon exercise of the Option for investment and not
with a view towards distribution thereof. In the event the Option
is not registered on Form S-8, Sprague acknowledges that any Common
Stock purchased upon exercise of the Option shall be deemed
"restricted" securities within the meaning of Rule 144 under the
Securities Act of 1933.

b. Sprague shall comply with the terms of the Option
Agreement.

c. Sprague is not aware of any claims or causes of action
which he, or any entity of which he is an officer, director, or a
1% shareholder or affiliate, has or may have against the Company,
any subsidiary of the Company, or any officer or director of the
Company or a Company subsidiary.

d. Although nothing in this Agreement shall limit or prohibit
Sprague from engaging in other business activities or services,
whether or not competitive to the Company, Sprague does agree that
during the term of the Option, Sprague will use reasonable efforts
not to disparage the Company or its officers and directors nor
engage in conduct (other than competition in the normal course of
business) materially adverse to the interests of the Company.

6. Indemnification. Notwithstanding Sprague's retirement from
the Board, Sprague shall remain entitled to indemnification by the
Company for acts during the time he served as a member of the Company's
Board of Directors to the extent permitted by the Company's governing
documents.

7. Miscellaneous:

a. This Agreement represents the entire understanding between
the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and this
Agreement supersedes any and all prior understandings or
agreements, written or oral, with respect to the subject matter
hereof, including without limitation, any understanding, agreements
or obligations respecting any past or future compensation or other
payments to Sprague by the Company.

b. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
<PAGE>
accordance with the laws of the State of California.

c. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enure to the
benefit of the executors, administrators, heirs, successors and
assigns of the parties hereto.

d. This Agreement may be executed in one or more
counterparts, all of which taken together shall constitute one and
the same agreement.

e. The waiver by either party of any breach of any provision
of this Agreement shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of
any other subsequent breach of the same or other provision hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Agreement as of the day
and year first above written.

bridgebuilder, the utility

of the digital butler is clear, but I doubt anyone is going to buy and carry a separate PDA device for that. More likely it would be an app accessible through the cloud and SKS knows that. So maybe there's a consumer app coming soon on your Samsung Galaxy phone, tablet or pc?

jermart, you left out the part where

Frankenberg joined the board of NSM in 1999, four years after Peter had left NSM. Also, you left out the part that mentions that Peter's consulting retainer is not uncommon for departing CEO's with 30 years of service. Or the part about Frankenberg joining numerous other corporate boards following his tenure at Novel. Don't these parts play a role in your narrative?

StevenDice, thank you for

adding some factual meat to the discussion. So far today, I've only read the same old, same old from persons with strong opinions and agile pens, but with little factual content with to back those opinions up. To wit:

"irrational compensation" - please provide a thorough comparative statistical analyis of compensation level proving this assertion

"But there appears to me to be a shortage of discipline." - to guide a development stage company throught the most technologically disruptive decade in world history and end up at the exact right spot is not the result of an undisciplined approach.

I hope to someday

read a well written book that will tell me why and how China copied TCG methods and why they find it important to maintain the fiction that they developed trusted computing.

In any case, I'm not surprised to see no TCG "names" attending their conferences.

Dear Weets,

I could have added, that if all 2 Billion enterprise pc's upgraded to Windows8 and then bought ERA's seats with TDM and WEM, it's about $200 Billion in sales and another $50 Billion in annual maintenance fees. But I won't mention that for now because it might take as long as 4 years for that upgrade cycle to occur.

ibelieveit, if you want


to store something like a key on a TPM, then you must turn on the TPM and take ownership.

If you turn on the TPM and take ownership, then you must manage the TPM.

If you want to manage an organization's 100,000 TPMs that are turned on and owned, then you can do it with ERAs.

So Windows8 adoption will help to drive demand for ERAs.

Why "or"

rather than "and"!

24601, you are right,


those are the steps needed to lock in the value of the shares. I was getting at a possible motive for selling the shares. But, in the end, it doesn't really matter what is motivating them.

Maynard,

a thought that occurred to me is that some of the Israeli VC's may have a tax problem. If some wrote their Safend interests down to zero they may now be facing an income tax bill on the gain accrueing from Wave shares. If so, they may need to sell Wave shares to pay the tax. This is just conjecture, as I don't know if or when they might have written their shares off.

dig, did you

notice in the preamble to the document that it speaks to the difference between an upper case MUST,SHALL, SHOULD and MAY and the lower case version? The upper case has increased definition.

1.5 Document Conventions
The key words “MUST”, “MUST NOT”, “REQUIRED”, “SHALL”, “SHALL NOT”, “SHOULD”,
“SHOULD NOT”, “RECOMMENDED”, “MAY”, and “OPTIONAL” in this document are to be
interpreted as described in Request for Comment (RFC) 2119 [IETF-RFC-2119]. When these words
appear in regular case, such as “should” or “may”, they are not intended to be interpreted as RFC 2119
key words.
Within this publication, the criteria for assigning requirements to MUST/SHALL, SHOULD, and MAY
are as follows:
MUSTs/SHALLs: Requirements that are needed to support the scenarios outlined in Section 2, AND
are feasible in the near term with currently available technology.
SHOULDs: Capabilities that are highly desirable and may be required in some circumstances to
support a particular operational need or robustness level.
MAYs: Optional requirements that may be desirable under some circumstances.

dig,

there are a lot of SHALLs. Point 3 below in particular can be done via WEM. It may be possible to do it in a different manner, but probably not as elegantly or efficiently as through ERA and WEM.

3.2.1.2 Security Guidelines for RoT Attributes
1. Endpoint vendors SHALL provide the attributes defined in Section 3.2.1.1.
2. Endpoint vendors SHALL provide reference measurements of executable BIOS boot code at the
lowest level of granularity for which they provide update and maintenance and that can be used to
verify measurements returned from the RTR.
3. Endpoint vendors SHALL provide a mechanism for measuring and reporting a baseline of measurements for BIOS configuration data.
4. Endpoint vendors SHOULD deploy BIOS measurement and reporting mechanisms that do not
preclude extension to option ROMs external to the system BIOS.
5. Endpoint vendors SHOULD provide attributes in a standardized format.
6. Endpoint vendors MAY provide an indication of compliance with [NIST-SP800-147].

Beef, if it is going to

pop, being in early will be less of a problem than being in late. But there's no guarantee it will pop.

weby, the viral uptake

may be muted. I think most people on social networks couldn't bother their pretty little heads about a security thing that just complicates who can see what. Suddenly, Tiffany will have to decide who to trust and who not to trust. The dilemmas that will result are beyond...

edit
!

The S&P putting all 17 EMU nations

on downgrade alert certainly puts a limit on market euphoria today.

zen 88, and maybe

next time Wave just needs to push back on the pricing discount requests. Wave is building the case one customer at a time that their solution is the best. Now that the technological risk card is losing traction, it's time for customers to pay for the value in the product.