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.
I can't help it,
but obviously VeriSign forgot to change their passwords in the last quarter.
escrow, I don't really see it working that way.
In seeking Army business I think Wave needs to be ready, willing, and able whenever the Army decides. The Army, not Wave, is then required to issue a notice of sole source if they are not going to open it up to the regular bid process. The Army, not Wave has a waiting period after the notice after which the Army, not Wave, can issue a P.O.
Whether Wave chooses to or feels compelled to issue a PR or 8-k (the P.O. being the material event) is the only component that falls under Wave's providence. Should wave feel compelled to 8-k the development then the rules require them to accomplish it within 4 days of the material event.
In all of this the matter of timing is entirely out of Wave's hands. I see no way for them to integrate the timing of a Federal award with other company matters. A private company, a BAsf e.g., sure. But not this.
This is coincidence. As I expect the Army's Sole to be somewhere in the $0.5-1.5m range (in the absence of information nothing beats a guess) it seems that an 8-k is a coin toss unless one considers such an agreement to fall outside Wave's normal business, that is that while they occasionally do services for the gov, they don't to the extent that it is "normal".
I'm not expecting much of a bounce from this. It is cryptic confirmation of what is believed by those who already believe it, and otherwise likely lacking the numbers to attract anybody else.
unix, profitability occurs about a week or two after it is made the top priority, or, happens on its own concurrent with a significant migration to TCG-based TC. It is not currently the top priority. A better question would be "when will profitability become the top priority". That will be dictated by circumstances that few if any can predict. So you can keep asking when the circumstances will be such that profitability becomes the top priority, and the answer will always be that such will be when circumstances dictate. (somewhat tedious reasoning) A simple reduction in R&D would achieve profitability today. You apparently would rejoice, I'd dump the stock. Different strokes.
NW, is the devil in the details?
I said:
I've got SMB/bundling up 13% last Q versus 2%, -5%, -3% and 5% for the previous 4 Qs. That is where SED upgrades would get buried.
when? I don't really ask the question 'when is Wave going to start making money'. Its a good question but not the one that answers the question. I frame it like this:
1. I believe a very large some of money is going to be spent bringing TC to IT.
2. When that happens, as currently positioned, I expect a significant amount of that money to go to Wave.
3. When will that happen??
I can take tweezers to Wave's expenditures, but in the end, it comes down to when real money starts to get spent with regularity in bringing TC to IT.
Hence the focus on NIST, DoD, grumblings and rumblings at NSA and so on. I hope Wave's suffers as little damage (dilution) as possible until 'then'.
I think that money is going to start to really move late spring 2012. But I could be wrong. Its not really a Wave thing though. If it misses I'm not sure if I'm going to say Wave missed, or that I missed on guessing when real money starts to flow.
If money flows and it doesn't go to Wave then ... ooops.
It looks like the RSA debacle and the NSA>NIST push, the glimmers of validation like the Army's Sole, are in agreement with that general window.
But I'm a demand guy. Screw supply.
NW, is it happening?
I've got SMB/bundling up 13% last Q versus 2%, -5%, -3% and 5% for the previous 4 Qs. That is where SED upgrades would get buried.
Wave claims that to the extent that SEDs are being managed, they are the managers.
I don't know what line item gave the jump in Q3, but it nis a decent jump.
unix, fair enough,
I, you, and SKS will never know if they spent too much or just enough. Certainly there are aspects of Wave's expenditures that I've gobbled a lot of bandwidth on.
If your argument is simply for maybe a COO-hawk to tighten the ship (subject to CEO approval ?) and do that whole top-down sales culture thing NW speaks towards then I'm on board. Note: the costs of just that senior exec in the past may well have equaled the savings. At 260+ employees and growing, it becomes more cost-benefit sensible. I would not be at all surprised to see Frankenburg urge for the creation of a COO type position. Not in 3 months, but maybe in 9 or 12.
1260, Wave has made public at very SEC worthy events (quarterly reports and conference calls) that they've got, what, $30 million in the pipeline? If folks with knowledge of a given contract invest because of that contract and that knowledge isn't public, that is naughty. Buying a bunch of shares based on what you said ($30m) becaues apparently the market doesn't believe you is simply expressing confidence in your company and what you have publicly said. The data supporting this exceeds my 15Gig internet connection, it happens all the time. A company gives a Q that disappoints, stock fades, but the guidance was for oodles of good things, the execs see the stock crater and say 'screw that' and buy buy buy. Form 4 comes out. Folks say, hmmmm, looks like management believes what they are saying and making public by formal means. Maybe mgmt it right.
There is a reason there is Form 4.
In my few decades of investing I have more money following Form 4 than anything else and NONE of those guys had legal issues as a consequence.
It is purely Wavoid denial IMO. I'm not dissing you, just the notion.
This is sooo much B.S.,
Insiders make long term investments in the companies to which they are insiders of based on publicly available information ALL THE BLOODY TIME!!\\END.
unix, FWIW, I did not say Wave would make a profit in Q4, and I don't really care if they do, I said that currently revenue is increasing faster than expenses and IF that were to continue more or less as it has been, THEN those lines cross somewhere around Q4. I don't expect either revenue or expenses to continue 'more or less' as they have been.
You belabor this point:
1) Something to the effect of 'How can Wave expect to make money if they spend money [up front]', indeed I believe you said spending money to make money is "illogical" (recognizing that none of this has really anything to do with logic, whether they make money or lose money has no bearing on whether reasoning was performed in a logical fashion)
You ignore this point:
2) Wave could make money today, yesterday, or tomorrow very very very easily ... simply drop R&D. You durable dismiss consideration of the fact that if Wave plans to be a successful independent company they need to invest heavily in R&D and forgo aspirations of near term profits (IMO). That is what they are doing. That is where the debate belongs.
As profits are at hand in the heartbeat it takes to suspend R&D (or even just halve R&D), the point becomes one of should Wave value more the near term profits or value more long term busines growth with the greater profits and durability that affords.
This is why for developmental companies the focus is typically on cash-flow, not profits. See the pharmaceutical industry start-up world e.g.
Now you could argue that they have been at it too long and it is time to turn a profit (curtail R&D), but in my view that is simply packaging the company for sale.
If what you advocate is packaging the company for sale, then say so.
Last Q Wave lost $1.8m with an R&D budget of $3.8m ... there's your near-term sought after profit. R&D runs about 1/3rd of Wave's expenditures in any given Q. One could argue (as you appear to be) that one should invest profits to grow a business, others can argue (me, and Wave publicly over and over, no mystery) that one can invest all available cash, and then some, in growing the business. Profits are not a near-term goal in the latter approach. Wave says profits are NOT a near-term goal. They are prioritizing long-term growth over near term profits.
Your sentiment may well be that this has gone on long enough. Fair enough. But that does not mean spending money up-front (R&D) to make money later is somehow "illogical". It is simply a choice. It is the choice Wave has made, it is the choice Wave has said publicly numerous times they will follow.
All of this involves guesswork on Wave's part. Cash inflow is irregular at Wave. One cannot double, then halve, then double R&D as cash inflow bounces around.
To bridge this doughnut hole in the bumps between cash inflow and steadily growing R&D expenditures Wave has established an AMT facility to draw funds from as required.
It has nothing to do with logic, it is simple a choice based in what one values and how they believe they can achieve it.
An ATM read from another site
At-the-market, or ATM, offerings have become a popular form of financing among real estate investment trusts such as Boston Properties (BXP) and energy companies such as Kinder lVlorgan Energy Partners (KMP) over the last year.
Their wide acceptance by investors is starting to be recognized in the small cap financing market as well, investment bankers say.
ATM offerings are a type of public offering using securities registered in advance in a shelf registration filing. They began to proliferate after 2005 when the Securities and Exchange Commission introduced reforms that allowed more companies to use shelf filings.
ln 2011, ATMs accounted for 22% of all follow-on offerings. up from 4% in 2007, according to MLV & Co., the leading underwriter for AIM transactions.
"This is a big boy product that we are bringing to small and mid-cap companies," said Seth Appel, a managing director of investment banking at New York-based MLV.
The product "really hit its stride during the 2008 financial crisis rvhere it was the only financing tool that worked effectively in a bad market," Appel said.
In an ATM offering, a company sells stock into the public market at the time of the company's choosing. In that aspect, AIM's are sometimes compared to equity line financings, but AIM's have several advantages for companies with enough liquidity in their stock to do them.
Equity lines are arrangements where companies negotiate with a small group of investors to place shares with them from time to time. Typically, the investors are granted discount pricing and warrant coverage and are sometimes given additional shares as a commitment fee.
Equity lines are often viewed as a financing of last resort for companies that aren't
even attractive enough to sell a more traditionally structured, unregistered PIPE. Because of that, equity lines include features that assure little risk for investors.
AIMs, by contrast, are public offerings that are only available to companies eligible
to file shelf registration statements. They are typically done at market prices and at times when a company's stock is relatively strong, making them less dilutive. They also don't require warrent coverage and have fewer and lower transaction costs.
By MLV's reckoning of public filings and data from research service Capital IQ, there were about 123 ATM transactions with commitments of at least $15.3 billion in 2011. In 2010, there were also 123 transactions, with commitments of $12.4 billion. In 2009, there were 119 ATMs, compared with 58 in 2008 and only 14 in 2007,according to MLV.
The firm, which was former$ known as McNicoll, Lewis & Vlak, arranged 29 ATM transactions in 2011, Appel said. Those included a $100 million transaction for XOMA Corp. (XOMA), a $70 million financing for BioCryst Pharmaceuficals (BCRX), and a $9.9 million deal for Prana Biotechnologr (PRAN). MLV's ATM practice is led by its Chief
Executive Oflicer Patrice McNicoll and President Dean Colucci. McNicoll is a former Cantor Fifzgerald & Co. banker, and Colucci is a former partner with the law frm DLA Piper in New York.
After MLV, the top underwriters of ATM transactions in 20ll were Bank of America, Cantor Fitzgerald and Citigroup Global Markets, according to PrivateRaise, DealFlow Media's data service.
The market for ATMs has developed for the most part with large companies. Indeed, the average market value of companies completing ATM transactions in 20ll was $3.39 billion, which is almost double the average market cap of $1.78 billion in 2010.
The REIT and energy sectors are where AIM use has been most prevalant, although technology, health care and basic materials companies also did AIM deals in 2011.
Boston Properties completed a $600 million transaction in February, while Houston-based Kinder Morgan Energy Partners completed its own $600 million AIM.
Other larger AlMs included a $500 million deal for Linn Energy (LINE), a $400 million ATM for PG&E Corp. (PCG), and a 600 million AlM for Digital Realty Trust (DLR). Twenty-two REITs received $4.98 billion in AIM commitments in 2011, while l4 energy companies got commitnents of up to $2.2 billion. Technology companies received eight commitments worth $l billion, and health care companies got 20 worth 5530.5 million.
"You could see more small and midcap companies use ATMs in the future because they've become widely accepted in the market," said William Kelly, head of equity capital markets at Knight Capital Group. But for small cap companies to be able
to use AIMs, they must have trading volume, he said. "If they're illiquid. it doesn't
make sense."
New York-based Knight Capital arranged six ATM offerings in 2011 with capital commitments of $295 million, according to Private Raise. They included a $140 million AIM for Vanguard Naturel Resources (VNR), a $60 million offering for Legacy Reserves (LGCY), and a $30 million ATM for China Shen Zhou Mining & Resources (SHZ).
"We've seen more of these ATM transactions as the markets have become more
volatile and it's become more difficult to do traditional capital raising," said Dan
Stauder, a managing director of private placements at JMP Group in Chicago.
ATMs have become more opportunistic way to raise capital from time to time," Stauder said. If they're done right they can have minimal impact on a company's
stock price. The filing requirements for ATMs also are 'relaxed" compared with other capital raising, he said.
"It's a low-cost way to raise money." Stauder said. They don't "take a lot of management's time" and don't involve a roadshow, he said.
San Francisco-based JMP Group arranged five AIM transactions in 2011. They included two ATM,s for Armour Residential REIT (ARR) and three of undisclosed amounts by Dynex Capital (DX), CYS Investments (CYS), and Supertel Hospitality (SPPR).
"The benefit here is the timing and size are at management's discretion and can be tailored to their needs," Stauder said. 'and you don't put your stock at risk of dilution with a ATM.
NW, I'm not going to disagree with anything you said,
Indeed I don't even know who the head of sales is at Wave (unless that is Berger) and certainly I haven't met any of these folks or dealt with them in any way except asking SKS a few Qs during a CC.
It does seem that part of what you are saying is that there has been a market, GM demonstrated that there is. That's not a bad point.
To some extent (I hope, and to the extent you are right) that mil and gov sales are less dependent a dude in a blazer and more driven by internal directives that are hopefully saying something to the effect of NOW.
Its something I never will know, success or not.
you know goin,
what I'd like to see now (silly silly Dig Space) is a From 4 in 2 days indicating an insider is who was sitting on the bid at 2.28 for the last few hours.
You know:
Gilder Buy 50,000sh at market ... that sort of thing.
Or Frankenberg
Not used to seeing a floor put in like that with Wave, usually its a cap. Curious.
dory, the point belongs to donald,
But it does look like the last three days saw a sell off from the SMA 200 all he way through the SMA20 and back to the SMA50 on higher than usual recent volume. If it can regain its footing north of the SMA20 then its looks like the question of how Wave is going to pay bills going forward is a settled matter, the effects for the moment are priced in, and the impact remains to be determined by how much Wave ends up relying on the AMT facility. Works for me.
Back to mil bizop sites. Wave's last two mil services deals were $750k and $1.6m as memory serves good for 6-9 months a pop (as I recall). While they have no bearing on the ArmySole, that range is kinda what I'm figuring which is right on the edge of 8-k land ... except one might argue size doesn't matter and mil services in general are not part of Wave's normal business in which case it gets an 8-k at lower levels then say an ERAS sale.
dory and donald,
So, (this is crack pipe stuff) in the coming days Wave announces a LOC collateralized by the by the shelf AMT authority and whalla ... the discrete leverage points of a PIPE are gone (for those chaing short theories), Wave has ample operating capital, and should things develop that allow them to service the LOC through revs, dilution is minimal.
I'd pay a bonus for that.
dory (my edit tab went bonkers) but yes, I imagine they could collateralize a operating LOC with the shelf authority ... the ATM agent serving as escrow? That could, it seems, further diminish dilution. Perhaps such a notion may be the 'something else' that alea waved towards.
dory/alea.
unclever had a great chart on all that, but I can't seem to find it, thought it was on awk's archive site.
on the $5-7 mill that's about where I'm at (obbviously its highly variable. Using a range of compounding quarterly growth rates for SGA and RD I get numbers anywhere from $3-10m, so $5-7 sounds good (with core SMB/bundling growing like Q3 and no large orders).
If there are no large orders in 2012, this ship has issues.
CSP (PwC)
ETS (Dell etc)
ERAS (GM etc)
TDM (GM etc)
WEM ($500k somebody)
WES (Salisbury)
EP ($3m/yr Safend, part of BEWML)
special expertise e.g healing hypervisors, OpenID
Samsung development
Army Sole development
... eSign
... some sort of scrabl thingy.
A couple mill in cash and an ATM facility for $20m.
Looks rather encouraging to me. Should one take a gander at 2009 PRs for awhile the difference is rather striking. Lots of "products" on shelves looking for buyers, not listed on the Nasdaq ... and a single forward looking OEM bundling some unused software for pennies.
Obviously Wave's billings line (inflow) is a very bumpy ride but as OldBigDeals takeconvert to maintenance and SMB/Bundling becomes larger this should start to be less erratic.
alea, on 20 million,
by my napkin its simply whats left ... they printed $5+ million for Safend, need some cushion for ESOP, bonuses, recruitment ... call that $5m, and $20m is what left on the shelf. The remainder of the shelf was afforded the ATM route. Cash flow wise one could hazard a guess in the $5-$10m range for what they may end up choosing to raise, at mid-2s SP some 2-4m shares. That's my thinking at least. The Q1 report in May will be the first glimpse of Wave's activity on this matter. It makes for a whole new thingy to guess about in late April ... how many shares did Wave print?
Applying it to the doughnut whole as I currently see it and I expect 1-1.5m shares to be reported as sold in the Q1 circa May10 report.
I don't think the Army Sole will bill all up front.
unix, its an interesting thought if it had a basis in reality
"If incoming revenue would cover expenses..."
STOP
It doesn't. If pigs could fly umbrellas would be stouter.
Expenses exceed revenue. Revenue is growing faster than expenses. Doughnut hole. If one projects the revenue line (or hockey stick or candelabra) forward and projects the expenses forwards, the lines cross. As things currently appear based on publically available SEC filings and assuming continuation of trends, something like Q4'12.
Choosing ATM as a method to access the shelf is an effort to bridge the gap. That is the "why" of your question premised on that which is not.
Sales Force,
(disclaimer: I am completely NOT a supply side theorist. I do not think businesses hire people in response to tax cuts, that iPhones sell because Jobs walked a stage so well, that people stop substance abuse if you attack the supply, or that IT savants buy ERAS because Wave built it or because Wave has scintillating sales personalities. I believe businesses hire in response to demand (not tax rate), that addicts abuse because of their demands (not the supply) and that IT folks buy things because circumstances demand they do, not because it is “cool”. Okay, done with the disclaimer)
Sure, competent sales is necessary to fill demand, and notably when there are multiple vendors. My utility co. doesn’t impress me with their sales staff. I demand their product. Wave’s difficulty is obviously bridging the need or demand into understanding of a solution and making it satisfactorily available. I hope/suspect that in addition to Souren, that a number of the fringe-of-DoD hires that Wave has done in the last year (according to linkedin thingy’s here) may well be culture of sales people. I hold (and have held) that all indications to me are that demand will coincide with the late spring gov cycle.
No amount of NIST has really moved me from that.
I can’t imagine any amount of culture overcoming the inbred arrogance of DIBs e.g. Circumstances will require them to move, and then they will. Not a dozen Souren’s. I believe those criteria have largely been met and if Sept comes around and things look more or less the same (cash flow negative, the occasional big deal pushing them forward), then I will have been wrong and expect a t.o. under disappointing terms.
I consider this latest development a very curious display of Wave breaking their own mold. I expect it to cost about 2m shares in a bunny out of my hat sort of way. I believe that the confluence of significant cash flow (albeit negative) Safend assimilation, funding requirements, federal mandates all over the place, and evidence of real pull put Wave in a position they have never been in before so I simply can’t hazard a guess how they will execute … its like watching a triatholon … ok, the guy can swim like a dolphin, does he know how to ride a bike? I don’t think PJS’ xpress thingy or even Finread can be used to provide much insight into now. We’ve seen Wave agonize with BASF and BEWML, and then pop out WEM with the pace of iWEM.
I’m wondering about that new BoD dude … seems like the right skill set for now and I’m inclined to think that Wave may well be on the path to brining in an Operations guy much sooner than grizzled old guard Voids think. CEOs are allowed to have COOs, and I suspect that the Safend-Wave merger may grease the skids on something like that …. current disparity in compensation, a clique of Lee, a colony in Tel Aviv and another in London all could run towards an internal Wave caste system, a good time to bring in an “impartial” “outside” COO.
I babble. This 8k makes me think more may be happening in the next 8 weeks than I had previously expected. Should be very interesting heading up to the annual report, I mean wholey barf bags, there are certainly some questions.
This is Wave doubling-down. The first pile of chips was the hiring spree during negative cash flow. They raised the bet by acquiring a cash flow negative enterprise to complement their own. Now, rather than doing a $10m placement and getting a pretty decent amount of breathing space (what I have been expecting, see something like every other post of mine for the last couple months), they decided to take a very SP sensitive incremental approach. The first bet indicated they see deals on the reasonably near horizon. Taking on the Safend burn raised their bet. Now they double down rather than make a big fixed price placement.
If they know exactly the size of the (modest) doughnut hole then they do small placement. If they have no idea of the size of the doughnut hole then they do a large placement. If they have a decent idea of the size but are wrangled with some uncertainly amidst significant broader confidence, they double down like this.
Regarding the statement to awk I generally read that stuff as Q: ‘do you plan on beating your dog tomorrow?’ A: ‘we are not beating out dog right now’. To which I say, fair enough.
As has been stated, there is no base price … and no ceiling price.
This is all-in.
That they are unlikely to show restraint in compensation and reward themselves prior to executing what they clearly believe they see is, of course, disappointing and frustrating … but they are at least consistent.
PMer digspace@ymail.com
Army Sole, agreed, I think its a coin toss whether it will even be 8-k material (>$1m). They did have a $1.6m services contract with gov in the past, SKS spoke towards another gov service thingy a couple CCs ago, so I put it at coin toss. I mentioned it more as an example of things Wave might see as rally fuel that they think they can sell into, but that the knowledge and reality of the overhang would permeate the circumstance. I'm not looking to be saved. I was pretty confident they were going to need money, . managed competently I prefer this to PIPE plus warrants. I think they took a slightly higher risk higher reward gambit. I think it reflects their confidence, but I do fear their confidence.
assuming your the prototypical Wavoid in my minds eye (60yr old, owned Wave a 1/4 of your adult life, own 300k shares) ... I doubt you'll see a share buyback
fair enough, i see it as a bridge LOC (or LOE) and I highly doubt they would run it like a death spiral. If I remember correctly I had them losing money at something like $250-300k per week, so "B.E" at current prices is 100-150k shares a week which represents about 10% of current volume (all give or take). Assuming e.g. that Army Sole goes public Feb10 with some numbers then one has a situation of speculator confidence running up against 10% over volume artificial supply. It is a very interesting gambit. Feeney does know how to fund a treasury, this is a new approach.
TWT
this gives them access to an amount of many, not a number of shares, nobody knows (including Wave) how many shares this may play out as, considering their supposed shock and the lack of a Samsung bounce, I fear their optimism.
They dumped options into a rally once that got them in SEC issues, they will likely have to be very careful with their news cycle it would seem except this would be the company treasury instead of the horse farm.
well, their authorization limit is 150m shares, until then your statement cannot be true.
correct, they could do that ... or as when companies do the opposite (share-buyback) place the order away from the market and cap it (or put a floor under in buybacks).
The agent is paid a commission, the incentive is get as much for each authorization as possible.
I expect (in a who knows fashion) the SP to tank initially (as Safend VCs bail) and that this one done prior to any money being needed to let the dust settle.
The alternative is a standard PIPE. Either they thought this was a better way to raise money with less dilutioin or they couldn't subscribe a placement.
Considering their impeccable record with PIPES I highly doubt the latter.
It's an equity based LOC, when Wave sees needing $100k in a month they authorize the sale of, say 50k shares but not below 2.00 a share ... and so on. Its a SP capper to the extent it is used, but limits dilution that which is actually needed and allows for dilution to be reduced by taking advantage of occasional rallies ... hence, a SP capper. If, as I see it, Wave books a deal in the next few months, the SP is capped in the interim, the horses get fed, a deal relieves cash-flow pressure and dilution is minimized.
Of course, does it give incentive to be cost thrifty? ... no evidence that that is in the vocabulary.
This is better than the past,
Wave is essentially selling directly into the secondary market yielding a commission of 3% which beats discounts and Warrants to lure PIPE money.
It will serve as a SP cap to the extent they need it, but doesn't commit them to print more shares than necessary.
In other words, they don't know when the next big cash-flow deal closes, they don't want to print a $10m PIPE and then have LMT decide tomorrow to drop $10m on ERAS-WEM and have generated unnecessary dilution.
Sure, it blows to dilute, but this is dilution the optimistic way in that the company seems to believe that its needs are not vast (if they dump $20m at the market SP would tank) but they reasonably expect capital needs (being the avid readers of DigSpace.org that they are) and believe that they can eek along with modest capping as necessary.
To me, it means the company has considerable belief in its pipeline and and wants to wiggle though without another private placement.
That, I believe, is one way to fill a doughnut.
lil' outfit in Redmond?
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windowsintune/pc-management.aspx
alladin, Salisbury
It seems to me if I were an SMB and somebody said they had an SMB product I would want the poster child SMB pilot customer to be an SMB.
If Bank of America was the SMB pilot customer, I'd be a tad confused and less likely to look into it as something for me, a SMB.
Just my 2 cents.
Hoping ...
I can't speak for a 'we' but I am hoping that LMT becomes a bloody customer, the whole partner thing will come and go.
My thinking is always that if I think I might be buying anytime soon then like to see the price go down, if I think I might be selling any time soon then I like to see the price go up.
That's just me, but its where I try to keep my focus.
Now, should equity financing need to occur sooner rather than later then that is a separate matter ...
cartoon, well, yes
I believe that additional capitalization may be required to
1) execute a roll-out on the scale dreamed of around here
2) stave off a takeover (I can't think of a rational reason why I feel this)
3) acquire additional assets necessary acquire/maintain/exert dominance
4) support significant development in Wave's non-Wintel efforts (which is part of 3 above as well)
5) enable Wave to conduct business in a other-than-cash-up-front fashion which may help accelerate deployment
I also believe that such capitalization may indeed be rather costly, but one can't have it both ways. So when folks say share price xyz on date abc, rarely do I see a good solid 20-30% dilution factored in.
SP should not be the conceptual target, rather mktcap with the appropriate consideration of how many shares are going to go into the denominator. Near term I use 88m shares as the denominator, that is what the market observes. That will translate into more like 120m shares if/when real analysts and large investors get on board. I could certainly see them issuing another 5m shares and rather easily see issuing another 30m shares.
Dividing a billion dollars of revs by 150 million shares drops out a different SP than dividing by 83m shares.
mundo, while not a prediction per se,
I did a little valuation thing last Nov by using availble metrics and applying a few forward looking assumpionts to the historical valuation of Wave and what I see generally be the case with companies that become hot.
(The numbers were speculation for SP Nov 2012)
SKS> $3.79-5.06 (using SKS’ modest reply to a question during Q3 CC)
DS> $4.18-7.19 (using my own rev speculation chart without anything ‘huge’ but continued growth with the occasional deal, this is basically what Shiba just said).
Koolaid> $5.16-13.78 (tosing in the notion of DoD going big, 1m seats, and that starting booking in Q3, obiously DoD has the capcity to go bigger)
It is all based on PS but importantly anticipates that big sales result in big sales growth which results in increased PS ratios.
It certainly is back of the napkin stuff, but provides some structure around which one can think. Definitely inside the box stuff, but all well within valuation ratios consistent with WAVX history and emerging hot stock companies (were that to occur).
PIPE is a wild-card.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=69111068
correct, brain said creditor, fingers said debtors ...
so one more time
Creditors are Investors ... in reply to your "shares went to creditors not investors"
debtors are investors, the invest in debt obligations.
Some FBCB2/BFT > BFTII > JCR > JBC-P stuff:
http://www.military-information-technology.com/mit-home/284-mit-2010-volume-14-issue-9-october/3541-qaa-brig-gen-n-lee-s-price.pdf
Q: Could you give us an overview of some of the exciting new technologies and systems that PEO C3T is currently working on?
A: Though our priority is the deployed forces, PEO C3T is actively engaged in efforts to develop and support the Army’s future network and battle command solutions of the future. Presently, we are building upon the extraordinary capabilities of Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below/Blue Force Tracking [FBCB2/BFT] with faster updates and enhanced security and bandwidth. FBCB2/BFT tracks and displays friendly vehicles and aircraft, which appear on a computer screen as blue icons over a topographical map or satellite image of the ground. Users can manually add icons to depict enemy locations or hazards, which are simultaneously broadcast to all the other FBCB2 users on the battlefield. Users can also send messages to one another similar to e-mail.
The next iteration of FBCB2, the Joint Capabilities Release [JCR], will enable type one encryption through the KGV-72 device. It will also integrate a new satellite network called BFT II, which will increase bandwidth by more than 10 times over today. Users will also be able to send and receive pictures and view higher-resolution satellite imagery. The system will automatically learn e-mail and contact address books of units new to the network, so users don’t have to load them manually.
JCR will also include access to the type one secret network. This will allow users to send secret data and interoperate completely with the command post. In contrast to today, where users have to toggle between Tactical Ground Reporting [TIGR] and FBCB2, TIGR will be co-hosted on JCR.
The enhanced capabilities that Joint Battle Command-Platform [JBC-P] will bring can be summed up simply: increased security, bandwidth, users and information. As a result, the joint warfighter is knowledge empowered, networked and interoperable. The system is mobile, meaning it is deployable worldwide and adaptable to support all types of units, missions and echelons. It must also be secure, reliable and provide accurate information for the increased joint user base. JBC-P will provide a more modern user interface with better maps and chat collaboration capabilities, and will include the successful TIGR system to enable analysis of ASCOPE information—that is, information collected over time about areas, structures, capabilities, organizations, people and events.
We are also excited about TIGR, which will transition from Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency program management to project manager, FBCB2 of PEO C3T on October 1, 2011. TIGR uses a “Google Earth”-like interface, pictures and unformatted text to provide a searchable database of unit activities.
Presently there are more than 85,000 FBCB2/BFT units fielded. We begin fielding JCR to the Marines in October 2010 and to Army units shortly thereafter. JBC-P will replace JCR in capability set 13/14. TIGR will be co-hosted with JCR in capability set 11/12 and will be integrated with JBC-P in capability set 13/14.