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.
Bingo: If you don't mind if I ask, how many trips to Lee have you made?
Blue
Waverider: Bob--it's not about egos at all--it's about the facts. We don't know what the facts are about deployment. We don't know what the facts are about the turn-on rate.
So rather than sitting around going rah rah Wave, we have tried to look at things creatively, constructively and objectively.
Some things have bubbled up to the surface that may not be lethal, but they certainly don't look good.
Many of the loyal longs have elected to listen only to themselves and to shut us out. That is certainly their prerogative.
CPA went to the mini SHM and got some answers. Some of the questions were not answered--I ask why? Many of the loyal longs brush it aside as if it were not important.
The chairman of the compensation committee does not know that the CFO and the CEO have annual renewable contracts. OK, what does that mean? If we have a great CFO and a great CEO, it means nothing, except perhaps the compensation committee is lax at best, incompetent at worse.
But assume for a minute the CFO is not doing such a great job. Why pay him as if he is? Why should there be the kind of bonuses awarded for this kind of miserable performance?
The loyal longs can shut their eyes and ears, but a prudent investor would take notice.
There are many items on the laundry list. All of which add up to decreased credibility on Wall St. and with potential partners-- and ultimately we pay the price.
Nothing is going to change, Bob, but that doesn't mean this company is run well and that we will necessarily survive the mistakes being made. I am not predicting failure by any means, just wondering why it has to be this way? Why is good governance and oversight not something to be sought?
It is not ego that is on the line here--it is ultimately our money.
You have been in this thing longer than I have and you have heard more promises than I have--and yet with all the broken promises to date, you give them more rope. Hard to understand.
Yes, it is much easier to call those of us who raise these issues ego-driven bashers. Just not true. If you would like to discuss the issues, I'd be happy to hear your side.
Bluefang
Logan: Thank you for the compliment, but please do not include me in the group of most knowledgeable. At one time I understood Wave as well as anyone here--but I lost interest for a few years and have not bothered to catch up technically.
I agree with your sentiments though, about CPA and especially Greg S for his technical knowledge. You are a brave person to say so in public, though. You may get trashed in the days ahead.
But we do need folks like yourself who are willing to look at all the issues, not just the pleasant ones.
Best wishes--Bluefang
VH: Very interesting article. Didn't Wave have some biometric plans for a keyboard a few years back? Wasn't it with Compaq?
The whole idea of verification of I.D. is necessary for trusted anything to work, IMO. But in most circumstances, it seems like overkill.
I would be willing to submit to finger and eye verification for important matters such as financial transactions. And we may see some biometric devices tie into Wave for personal attestation purposes in the near future.
In this whole field, the introduction of terror has overcome many of the privacy objections, although personally, I never understood that argument. Any device that proves Bluefang is Bluefang is good. One of the Northeastern states was going to use fingerpints to I.D. welfare recipients, but backed down when the privacy advocates claimed recipients were being fingerprinted like criminals.
Perhaps I am insensitive, but the real reason was not to treat recipients like criminals, but to keep criminals from receiving public money they were not entitled to. Political correctness won out.
Bluefang
Larry: Any predictions which way it will go?
My guess is down slightly. Trading seems light, so any big buys or sells would seem to affect the price way out of proportion. But then I am so out of my league on this stuff.
I'm in for the long haul--one of those dinosaurs, a buy-and- holder--one foot in the tar pit and the other in the grave.
Bluefang
Barge: You asked what I saw as Wave's unique advantage in the Trusted Computing sector.
I thought it was flexible (upgradeable) security plus attestation and an ability to keep and to manage secrets such as passwords, etc. in one place.
I am hardly the techie you are and do not have the know-how to analyze whether the above mentioned items are unique to Wave, or if other companies also have these features.
It seems like a formidable set of tools to have in an age where content is king, as long as that content can be secured and secrets protected.
This is what has always baffled me about Wave. Why isn't this product flying off the shelves? Of course, the answer is, we don't know if it is or isn't. But I think we all suspect that if it were selling fast and furious, we would have heard something, or seen some sort of exterior signs somewhere that it is.
If, in return, you could address this portion of my concerns, it would be helpful and perhaps we could have a meaningful discussion that might possibly advance our understanding.
Bluefang
Jas: When put that way, perhaps it is a valid comparison--Wave vs Amazon. But perhaps what you are not considering is that Amazon had revenues almost from the start. Yes they had losses and they spent even more as they were losing money to capture the market. This was smart.
Wave on the other hand has never had revenues. Wave has promised revenues for years. To me, that is the key difference.
And what kicked off this conversation was the moving timeline for break-even point. SKS clearly said revenues in Q4 2003, break-even point in 2004. Now break even point has moved back to 2005 or 2006. This comes on the heels of many revenue projections by SKS that simply had no chance of coming true.
So, in my mind, the differences between the two companies is simple. One had product, the other promises. One delivered, the other did not. Amazon did eventually reach their break even point, but not on the announced schedule, that is true.
Best wishes--Bluefang
DutchBJ: Unfortunately, I am here for awhile, because this is where my money is invested. May I suggest, dear Flyer, that if the malicious, sarcastic and derisive postings of me and my ilk bother you so much, why not skip over them?
And what does Snackman's defense of me have to do with this post which so deeply offended you?
This was about Greg, whose knowledge of the technology and the this sector in the real world surpasses any here before, IMO, and all of a sudden he questions whether SKS equivocated to the shareholders--and lo and behold, he is transformed into an outcast. Yes, Snackman threw the first stone in a pattern that has become so exceedingly obvious.
Those who raise uncomfortable questions must be driven out.
Personally, I think Greg has contributed a great deal in his short stay here and I'd like to see him stick around.
After he is chased away like the others have been, you may wish he was here to explain some complicated technology questions that may arise.
His ill-starred treatment is despicable, IMO. He came here and shared his knowledge and his opinions based on long experience and was fine until he picked up on the latest of SKS's many equivocations.
Same thing happened with Magdalina. She was welcomed into the Wave community for many years until the day she questioned SKS's changing timelines for revenues. Now she is gone.
Slate Colt gave up the fight after at least seven years in Wave.
Many others who I could name have just gone quietly. Many have written me privately to say they were hounded out of here and intimidated. Is this the community you want?
Why not just migrate back to the private DD board where you can high-five and backslap each other in comfort and keep realists and troublemakers like me away from you?
Why do we have to have bullies here? I suspect Greg can take care of himself, verbally and otherwise. It is wrenching to see this again and again--particularly when you see the wolf pack attacking someone who has as much to offer as Greg.
Why don't you go back to the DD board, Flyer? And take your miniature pit bulls with you. Civil discourse is what we are here for, not the severed and slashed jugulars of dissenters.
Bluefang
Jas: Except for the fact that Amazon had a profit and had actual sales, whereas we have had promises of same. There's a difference.
Jeff Bezos did not have his father and his brother on the payroll in the top offices of Amazon either. Another difference. I could go on, but I'd be popped for being repetitive.
Bluefang
Spin: Great send-up! A masterpiece of Sprague-speak. You missed only the part about "cool things". Other than that omission, it was perfect.
The only thing better than today's PR would be another demo.
Bluefang
KeV: In all fairness, IMO, this was not the fault of Wave. The music business was in total chaos two years ago. It was only Apple's i-Tunes that made paying for music a reality. Apple changed everything with the combination of a great MP3 player, workable software for downloading and a big selection of music to buy at a reasonable price with relatively few restrictions.
Now others are following that model.
You know I have been critical of Wave's inability to gain traction in virtually every market they have tried--but in this case, Wave is not to blame, IMO. It would have been nice, but it was not meant to be.
Best regards--Blue
Serious Wave business: This was sent to me by another member. Have no idea whether it is true or not. Could explain some things.
"From RB board:
....................
Intel TPM motherboard not available for retail yet
Contrary to the distributor I called directly last week that said they have 150 Intel D865GRH motherboards on order with the first due 11/28/03 a regional retailer I contacted replied to me by the email excerpt below:
"At this time, we do not intend to stock that board. Moreover, it is not currently available at our distributors. However, once they receive it in stock from Intel (they do not have an ETA yet), we can special order it for you."
They estimate the board price to be $135.00."
__________________
Anyone want to guess at what this means, assuming it is true?
Bluefang
Bingoman: That was repetition by proxy, the proxy being satire as a placeholder for lampoonery.
It would please me greatly if you could refrain from answering my posts. And if you can't, I shall refrain from reading your replies. Deal?
Let's talk Wave now, OK. With Snackman in your sidecar, take any trail you like.
Bluefang
mbarr: I have no knowledge about either question you pose. It has been debated many times by Wavoids about what we might do if an attractive offer came in. Basically, I suspect it would be out of our control.
Does Wave have the infrastructure to support a volume of 5 mil. in 2005? Again I have no answer, but I did pose a similar hypothetical question to SKS many moons ago. As best I remember he said something along the lines, that they do not want to be swamped by their success and that they would take the time to ramp it up slowly enough to still provide good service.
I assume the same would hold true for your question, but perhaps someone else better qualified could take a crack.
I'm sure many of us hope that is our problem, that we are so swamped with volume we are straining under the load.
Best--Blue
Zen: The truth will out, that's for sure. Sooner, rather than later. I long for it.
Happy first of December.
Bluefang
Mammon: You wrote: "sigh] bluefang, if I could use profanity here, I would. You honestly believe the longs are monolithic? I think it just suits your matyr complex to believe that everyone is against you and your astute [sic] insights."
First of all, the [sic] should have been placed after "matyr" which I believe you intended to be martyr.
Secondly, you were the ones who railed against CPA, myself and a few others for believing the longs are monolithic. No one ever asserted that other than yourself, in my memory. I was simply poking fun at you.
Believe it or not, I am a long. CPA is a long. Magdelina is a long. What we have in common is that we have criticized Wave.
So, by definition, that shows longs are not monolithic.
Nowhere have I asserted that I have insights or that if I did, they are astute. By the same token, I can not think of a single post by you that was enlightening either.
I am painfully aware my constant criticism has irritated many here. But I do not believe everyone is against me and have no martyr or matyr complex. I have stood against what I thought were bad situations and have accepted a great deal of abuse in return. I stand ready to apologize if I am off the mark.
There is an easy cure for the kind of anger I seem to trigger in you and your kind (the mythic non-monolithic longs)--don't read messages to, from, or about Bluefang.
Now could we get back to the business of discussing our investment?
Bluefang
Zen: Amazing you were able to pin it down so well. It is a technique I learned from close examination of the mythic non-monolithic longs. Keep repeating the mantra over and over, without any factual basis, until the masses are soon chanting along.
"June is ours!"
"Things are good."
"Things Take Time"
"It is no longer a question of if, but when."
"We own this space."
"We hope to reach the break-even point by late 200X (after 2009, to be known as 20XX)."
_________
The only thing for which I personally can claim as an improvement to this technique, is the addition of a factual basis, placed on a "prove it" platform (non-reference design), with filters for correcting rose-colored vision.
I am donating all profits to a fund for those who have been seriously injured leaping to conclusions about Wave's "guaranteed success."
Bluefang
Greg: go-kitesurf believes it is a platform. You are unlikely to change his mind.
Thanks again for your many contributions to this board and advancing our knowledge.
Bluefang
go-kitesurf: The most repetitive thing about our posts to each other is you complaining that I post the same thing over and over, when it is simply not true.
There is nothing about trusted computing that I don't like. I do, however, resist the assertion that we are in every device on the shelves and that customers are going to turn them on en masse. If it happens, like you, I will be extremely happy.
If it does not happen--and there are many reasons that it might not--like you, I'll be unhappy.
Now could we please go back to ignoring each other? I have no problem with you reveling in irrational exhuberance--it is your God-given right. But please, allow me a little skepticism, until this is proven.
My Wave diet for more than seven years has left me suffering from a severe case of multi-faceted malnutrition. Beautiful dreams have neither nourished my bank account, nor my acute sense of reality. Waiting for revenues has been like waiting for Godot. Trusted Computing is real indeed. My question is about Wave's role in this new firmament.
P. S. I would not be so quick to brush off Greg's assertions. He seems to understand this sector and playing field very well. Thus far, his answers seem to me to be a lot more credible than those coming out of people like yourself, who think it a given.
Nine platforms and counting; no revenues and holding.
Bluefang
OT John: Caught red-handed! Guilty as charged, m'Lord.
The only mitigating circumstances are I kant know what the K in SKS stands for, whether it is knight or knave, kaiser or kibitzer, ketchup or kohlrabi.
In short, sir, I am knot knowledgable about the key kryptic in the kitchen of our Kingpin. Thus, I kneel on knobby knees before you, knickers knocking like a kettledrum, urging your keeness to kraft a little mercy on a kinsman.
Blue without a Klue
OT: go-kitesurf--I can overlook the patronizing tone and the haughty condescension in your last post to me, but not your mischaracterization of the facts and your misrepresentation of future possibilities as accomplishments.
What do you say we both go back to ignoring each other? Neither of us seems to be making any headway in respecting the other's viewpoints. Please feel free to believe Trusted Computing and Wave's success have arrived.
I will wait for the revenue figures and subsequent bump up in share price.
Have a good day.
Bluefang
Doma: It was not I who made the place-holder comment. I asked Greg for clarification, but the question was not answered.
As for Greg's views, ask him your questions.
______
Either you have misconstrued my views, or me yours. I did not say Trusted Computing was not coming. I challenge the assertion that it will be ubiquitous almost immediately and that this automatically means Wave will be ubiquitous.
I separate Wave from Trusted Computing, until it is proven that as Steven K. Sprague claims, we own this space. As yet, there is precious little proof of anyone owning anything, or even if the idea will fly. All it would take would be one hack at a critical juncture and the world would turn away.
Despite these doubts and the uncertainty, I still remain hopeful. My position is that our success is not a given. I choose to remain with questions in place, until I see proof of acceptance.
There are no links to support my views.
This post is certified acronym free. No initials were used or harmed in the production of this message.
Bluefang
go-kitesurf: You wrote: "my comments - obviously, looking at this, comments from gregs and Bluefang regarding whether this technology is coming seem to be pretty naive. Intel and AMD are both working on their processor designs and technology to utilize a TPM and increase the need for processors and obviously, security with a TPM is part of that roadmap for them to sell more CPUs. There is no doubt in my mind at this point after seeing this and the new chipset for the Intel 852GME board that TPMs will be everywhere: PCs, Cell phones, Cars, appliances, everywhere electronic
________________________________
I don't think I ever said trusted computing was not coming. And to my knowledge, Greg S never said it either.
Both of us (me, the tech neophyte) expressed doubts as to whether it is flooding the inventory shelves right now. Greg ventured an opinion that this was a test/trial balloon, or perhaps a place-holder on the part of Intel--which, if true, means it is not an integral part of any mass production line planning.
I am not technically proficient enough to know. But when one group (not the mythic monolithic longs) claims these boards with the TPM's are available and several Wavoids are currently actively involved in trying to buy one-- unsuccessfully thus far-- it does raise questions, if not some suspicions.
There is literature and there are photos, or graphic depictions of such devices--but they appear to be in short supply.
Not to touch off another firestorm, but if they were that hot, if they sold the minute they arrived, I suspect more people would be buying Wave stock.
That seems a logical assumption to me. Of course the non-monolithic Wave longs will have many reasons why this is faulty logic, faulty reasoning and faulty posting.
This post is not an oblique attempt at bashing by any means. It is an honest effort to try to sort out what is real, from what is unreal. It seems to me the first question on the table should be--are we being delivered to enterprises in quantity? Second question to follow: Are the enterprises which may be getting shipment, actually using this technology?
Both questions need to be answered "yes" if we are to have any hope at real revenues.
Some Wave longs have proclaimed and predicted massive deployment for so long, it now seems almost a given among some. My question is that based on reality or not? It would be helpful to know.
Bluefang
OT: 2BS: What a great article on the i-Pod. I have two of them and they are my most prized possessions. Sound quality is startlingly good.
Thanks--Blue
2BS: My experience here has been there has been very little pure bashing on this board, unless I am considered a basher. Real bashers are unmasked pretty quickly.
My point was we nearly offended Greg S on his first foray here and it turns out he has been extremely helpful in trying to see where we are and where we might be going.
Some data is favorable to Wave and some is not. If we chase away all but those with favorable info, we are skewing the data we need.
Greg's contributions today alone have been invaluable to me in trying to get my arms around whether we are making progress or not. It was also clear to me that some of the DD big guns on this board learned some things today too.
That's all, just a friendly reminder to let us hear all voices.
Best wishes, Bluefang
To All: Greg has exactly the kind of technical know-how and experience we need on this board.
And yet, he was nearly slapped down the first day he came aboard. I mention it only to call attention to how vital other viewpoints are, and how unfriendly the atmosphere can get here very quickly.
Greg, many, many thanks for sharing with us today.
Best wishes--Bluefang
Greg: Thanks much for your opinion. If it were the latter, a place holder, what would you see as it holding the place for?
Blue
Greg: In a much wider view, could you comment on whether you feel the current Intel board with Wave in it is simply a test/trial balloon, or the first part of an integral widespread implementation?
TIA--Bluefang
OT--Jas--I was so impressed with his savvy that years ago, I bought DRIV at the same price as Wave--around $6. It has been to $33-34 in the last 2 or 3 months, and now down to about $23. It's that old buy & hold philosophy--can't seem to shake it.
Thanks for the contributions--Blue
2BS: Fascinating series of posts. Everything is evolving isn't it?
Regards-Blue
OT Waverider--Bob! Holy Moly! You were one of the early posters I always read on SI. I was Duchess on RB.
It has been a long, strange trip. I suspect the conclusion of our odyssey will be equally strange, as well as big and dramatic--whether good or bad.
Do you ever hear from Doc Stone? I am occasionally in touch with Pure Folder--I think he is completely out of Wave.
This Thanksgiving has certainly been a time for memories. Congratulations for sticking around for so long.
Best wishes--Bluefang
24601: John, that is very helpful. My memory of dates is so shaky it can not be trusted.
Regards--Blue
Jas: Great post! Thanks for the fine memories you triggered.
Re: Snackman--IMO, his only crime is loving Wave too much and in his boundless love, he tries too hard to protect her.
Most of us have all probably spent too much time obsessing and dreaming about the brilliant idea that is Wave.
It is out of our hands now, and for better or worse it is in the hands of the dance partners who brung us.
Still long, still hoping, still crazy after all these years.
Blue
24601: John: This happened before I became involved. This was a version given to me by someone I trusted at the time, but whom I can not remember now. It is not important. If it is not true I never want to reference it again. I thought it was general knowledge.
As for your other comments, I believe you may be stretching things a bit to say that this early group referred to in the CRN article evolved into the trusted computing group. I can not state with authority that it did not, but I do not believe that is what happened.
I spoke to Plympton today and he could not remember if our trip to Lee was made in 1997 or 98 either.
I am much more interested in the present and in the immediate future, as in what happens next.
Thanks for your clarifications.
Best regards--Bluefang
John: Toro did put it well. And if it happens, I'm sure it will be incorporated into WaveLore. My view as all of you know is slightly different.
Blue
24601: John I am the first to admit to a fading memory. But you are probably correct about the 1998, rather than '97. However I am positive about the CRN alluding to an agreement with most of the major PC OEM's and when Plympton and I asked him about the 90-day timetable, he said words to this effect, "That sounds about right."
Otherwise, I would yield to your memory rather than rely on mine. Jas seems to remember it the way I did, if I am not misinterpreting what he said.
In no way was I trying to bash or rehash old grievances--I was trying to fill in Greg about our ancient history.
The NASDAQ delisting of which you spoke, came about after Wave slipped below the required minimum and SKS allegedly told the Naz that he had signed agreements with all of the major OEM's. They said we could stay on the Naz, if SKS would show them just one signed agreement.
This is my best memory and again, is not offered to bash or rehash.
Best to all--Blue
Jas: Thank you for good advice. Thank you also for supporting my memory of what occured.
None of this was meant to be bashing, or even negative--in fact I thought it showed Wave's persistence.
I guess if you think I am a basher, anything that comes out of my mouth is therefore bashing.
Best wishes, my friend--Blue
Rooster: The last paragraph of the article on the Irish PKI company, Baltimore, gave me chills. Read it again and think of Wave. No this not bashing, instead, a realistic view of what we are up against.
" 'James Governor, principal analyst at RedMonk, said Baltimore's mistake was to bet the house on PKI. "It is also difficult to sell a portfolio that has a lot of different pieces related by a theme, and you're trying to tie them together," said Governor, referring to Baltimore's attempt a year ago to package up its PKI technologies.' "
Best to all--see tomorrow
Blue
Addendum: Snackman--the infamous CRN article of June 1997 was all about SKS saying most of the PC OEM's were onboard with the idea of putting Wave in. He said he expected the agreement to be announced within 90 days. He reiterated that in person, when Plympton and I visited Wave HQ and met with him in July '97.
Wave worked long and hard on the PC avenue before concluding it was not going to happen and they needed to go in different directions.
From here, we went into discussions with Phoenix, we had the Haup board, the dongle, the keyboard, etc--not necessarily in that order.
We also had earlier discussions and negotiations with Intel and we do not know the reasons, Intel walked away. CPA claimed in a post that Wave got greedy and wanted to big a cut and Intel slammed the door on Wave and left the table.
My memory is that this is not exactly what happened. We may never know, because it has never been publicly disclosed. Perhaps if and when SKS pens his memoirs. For those new to this stock--Intel had just received a big, public slap in the face for putting a unique I.D. serial number on each CPU they made, which would have made it easy to track each computer transaction to a particular computer. Intel, after a public firestorm over the issue, backed down.
This may have played a role in the Intel discussions. Sort of like now, those who do not understand Trusted Computing see in the concept, some sort of paranoid plot by software makers to be able to obliterate pirate software from a user's computer by remote--instead of seeing how it would cut down on fraud and protect users.
One loves to do a little dreaming and wonder what might have happened had Intel and Wave come to terms, lo those many months ago.
Anyway, Snackman, I hope this provides the substantiation you are looking for.
Best, Blue
mongo98--Good one!
Blue