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.
wavxmaster, talent
Wave may well be in the drivers seat in attracting talent, but it is such a poaching business, retaining will require diligence.
Booz, Qcom, etc. ..
Heading into the land were Wave will need to fight to retain talent.
awk, fair enough,
my point was really just that regardless of whether its vanilla-COTS-Wave, tweaked-pseudo-COTS-Wave, or novel-Wave ... Wave products are proprietary regardless of whether they are supporting vanilla Opal devices.
SKS mentioned I think 2 CCs ago that they were eyeing another services deal with gov.
You think that .mil has decided to upgrade F2BCC with Wave, but that they want some engineering work done prior to deployment, or that they've bought stuff they want tweaked. I'm figuring the former.
The last mil services arrangement was the $1.6m add-on to a previous consulting gig that wrapped up in Feb 2011 as I recall.
Seems this could show up in two weeks as a 1+m services contract with any big licencing thing still waiting in the shadows?
custom or not,
If the solution is COTS ERAS-TDM and DoD concludes there is no COTS alternate to ERAS-TDM then the statement would be true, ERAS-TDM is fully proprietary regardless of whether it supports an open standard.
yup, the sole source posting means a quote is in hand, terms are agreed to, there is no alternative, and the notification goes up for a couple of weeks just to make sure nobody has a alternate solution.
well jake's dad, there was all that hiring, the networthiness, all those linkedin profiles of hires with DoD familiarity and so on so I guess a shoe had to drop sooner or later. i was thinking about that train hack earlier today and was closing in on getting just plain angry that measures were not being taken more rapidly so while I am certainly excited about my 7 shares, I'm surprised at how quickly I found myself, I don't know ... comforted that DoD was finally taking some available steps to secure the devices that the individuals in the services depend on.
dabears4, uh, nice find.
decent chance this might find its way to highlight box above.
Sole source justification is based on argument that a competitive alternative does not exist, waives the normal duration of a competition window, and typically allows the P.O. to roll after a very short posting period (generally 2 weeks as I understand it).
Sole source justification requires documentation by the requester of efforts to find competitive alternatives and rationalization of nearest products insufficiencies as it pertains to the need/mission.
Again, great find. Depending on scale this could go 8-k after the public posting interval (2 weeks?). Just musing on that (based on my understanding of timelines from a Sole Source notification and a P.O.)
wavexmaster, that 'in the next few weeks'
was BEWML, and that has now booked and PRed.
The rest is "adding potential projects", and while I don't want to parse a potential project vs a project, there is no clearly indicated next up, the is a big portfolio of potential projects added to a pipeline of potential.
The tone, to me, was 'we feel good' but it'll be a bit before the large order pipeline delivers again.
Wave's Pipeline,
One of the curious things about Wave today is the lack of a well advertised next up in the pipeline. It seems BEWML and BASF had plenty of foreshadowing to the point where mgmt would spend a fair bit of CCs talking about the progress of specific sales opportunities.
There is no such specific deal being chatted up by Wave these days.
Given that Wave mgmnt is under the impression (falsely imo) that the kinetics of BASF missing Q1 led to SP erosion and investor wrath, one possibility is that Wave has learned to / decided to keep its mouth shut about pipeline specifics.
The other possibility is there is no clear next up in the pipeline. That is what I believe. That's why I think PIPE before deal. It gets down to the whole SKS tone thing.
Wave has IMO systematically downplayed the potential of a big DoD thing at the level of an 8-k level thingy. They have slightly talked up DIB as potential 8-k worthy opportunities. But there has been no talk of anything pretty much in the bag as there was for BASF and BEWML.
It seesm to me the things to look for 7 or so weeks from now (in the Annual report) will be
1) SMB/Bundling/maintenance/Safend sales (total revs minus ~2.87m (GM/BASF/BEWML) minus services)
2) the services figure as some sort of window into Samsung or gov development or bigger-than-pilot-pilots
3) a full quarter of consolidated Wave+Safend expenses.
4) cash
There is an important catch to all of this that could represent a real short term buying opportunity IMO ...
IF Wave gets to the time to report Q4/Annual and they have not PIPED AND IF there has been no 8-k worthy sale .... THEN SMB/bundling/Safend results MUST (IMO) demonstrate serious 'beats estimates' upside kinda growth that should rattle some windows (again IMO).
title, certainly possible,
the 15% SMB/bundling growth I'm assigning works out to $975k ... but we already 'know' of $500k in WEM ... with a maybe/we'll-see $500k more in WEM, and those two items alone would exceed what I'm giving in new business growth.
There is no doubt that if one finds a million here and a million there eventually one is talking about real money.
The other thingy is Safend. Most of Wave's SMB/bundling is Dell (about $5m of the $6.5m in Q3), the remaining $1.5 represents IMO opportunities to cross-sell Safend onto Wave's fledgling SMB business. If the $1.5m in SMB sales in Q3 was $50/seat and essentially all new customers then we are taking some 30k seats which if one staples on say $20 worth of Safend fun is another $600k (and vice versa with Wave onto Safend customers) ... but my thinking is that it'll take a Q or so for the cross-selling synergy to take hold.
It seems to me that Wave has likely taken the Safend customer list, sent them all an email saying Hello folks, Safend is now Wave-Safend, and we'd like to introduce you to a whole new layer of TPM/SED stuff, but again, I'm figuring that will take a little time to settle in.
I like to think of my $11m new billings for Q4 as a good solid somewhat modest guesstimate. I could certainly see that being $12m (WEM+15% on baseline). If Wave's Q4 report can be deciphered enough to find $13m in new billings, I would consider that a full blown hockey stick and would expect to see a serious buzz and new coverage coming on line. Seriously, that would be covering the GM drop-off, vacate the anticipated reported revs dip for Q1, and if sustainable largely eliminate need for 8-k worthy large orders (dropping it to just one $2m deal for the year).
I'd put that at about a 10% possibility.
(OT) PIPE notions explained
My speculation that funds run out this Q in the absense of a 8-k worthy new sale are basd on a number of important but rather pedestrian assumptions.
1) SMB/bundling sales growth rate
2) Safend income
3) Safend expenses
4) Wave expenses
5) AR-AP
SMB/bundling sales growth rate for the previous Qs was (by my calations backing out announced large orders and reported services revs) are as follows (QtoQ) Q4’10: -3%, Q1’11 : -5%, , Q2’11: +2%, Q3’11: +13%.
What was flat or declining SMB/bundling sales took a significant jump in Q3. I consider this the most important revelation of the Q3 report. It is a point I feel is broadly under appreciated in Waveland. A few bean counters like myself had been lameneting this flat/declining aspect of Wave’s numbers and finally seeing some real growth there is very encouraging and hopefully continues. In light of this I am assigning a bullish 15% QtoQ SMB/bundling growth rate in Q4 numbers (and Q1 numbers etc). Talk of an otherwise unreproted $500k WEM sale in the Q3 CC helps form the basis for this bullish guestimate of SMB/bundling growth.
Safend income. I am essenitally taking what info there is available for Safend and assigning $1.5m in Safend billings for Q4.
Total billings:
Q3 SMB/bundling $6.5 + %15 +$1.5m for Safend + $500k services (just pulling a Samsung bunny out of the hat) + $1.7m BEWML = $11.0m
Safend expenses. I am simply doing the same for Safend income and assigning $2.0 in expenses for Q4
Wave expenses. Wave SGA and RD expenes bounce around considerably, but total expenses (SGA+RD+COS) provide a slightly more stable metric, and over the last 6 Qs Wave has been increasing total expenses 10% QtoQ . I use that value.
Total expenses: Q3 $11.3m +10% + $2m for Safend. = $14.5m
AR-AP was -$1.1m end of Q3. In my assumptions, I migrate that back to zero. Perhaps Wave can push the AR-AP imbalance forward.
End of Q3 cash was $6.9m + 11.0m billings - $14.5m expenses -1.1m AR-AP deficit = $2.3m end of Q4 cash on hand.
Applying the same growth in SMB/bundling (15%) with Safend now lumped in gives Q1 billings of $10.3m, expenses (10% growth) of $16m and and end of Q cash on hand deficit of -$2.7m. That, friends, is the doughnut hole (assuming some serious orders on the other side (Q2-Q4) to make it a hole and not a chasm.
A few reasonably pedestrian thingys can impact this. Expenses may grow at a more modest 5% QtoQ (it’s happened before) and AR-AP could push forwards. (Expenses saving over 2 Qs $1.3, AR-AP push $1.1). That still leaves an end of Q deficit of -$300k.
So yes, I see a need for a Q1 large billed order or a PIPE, or both. Were the first scenario to play out uniformly, Wave would be cashless in the third week of February. In the later scenario (reduced expense growth rate and pushing AR), they would last until the last week of Mar.
Wave needs to take in a $5m large order every Q and maintain QtoQ SMB/bundling/Safend growth of 15% and QtoQ expense growth of 10% in order to avoid seeking funding. I don’t see it happening. I see a $10m PIPE unless they get some sort of LOC or other such instrument.
Obviously, SMB/bundling could shock to the upside, but I find this unlikely for one simple reason ... folks here can find thingy's on page twelve of some sort of Alabama correctional facility (or whatever) indicating a Wave sale of 10 seats and as such I exclude millions in sales flying out the door under Voids' noses.
Moving Averages
The SMA20 crossed the SMA50 last week (Jan 20). This is broadly seen as a minor bullish indicator.
In this SP range the SMA50 is just going sideways (the numbers scheduled to come out of the average are 2.50ish, and at this SP the numbers going in make for no change in the ave (for the next 5-7 days). After that the numbers coming out of the SMA50 are 2.10ish, in which case if the current SP holds the SMA 50 can actually start to move.
The numbers coming out of the SMA200 are in the 3.20ish range for the next couple weeks, so baring a significant SP climb it will continue its leisurly decline.
The more broadly observed bullish crosses (20x200 and 50x200) are “any day now” with any reasonable SP climb (its all simply a matter of the fact that the doldrums have lasted long enough for the 200 to fall, not so much that the 20 or 50 have made any sort of run).
Regardless of how the junction has formed, when those three averages come together in a largely sideways fashion as they have, the stock is largely liberated from technical perceptions of resistance or support based on averages, … other technical considerations would form the basis of any uber-TA-SP-jihadist speculation.
Personally, I like looking at WAVX’s long sine Wave and the mingling of the averages prior to a run. FTFOI I bought the 20/50 cross (and that whole trade-thru thing resolved so I got all 7 shares instead of a measly 6).
Regarding the local chart patters, from Dec 9 low forward WAVX has begun putting in higher lows and one could argue that breaking somewhat minor technical resistance at 2.66, 2.77, and somewhat major resistance at 2.92 are needed to pave the way into the 3s.
WAVX’s strong correlation to IWM waned late Nov thru most of Dec (a period that saw a fair increase in short interest), but has largely appeared to reaquire its correlation to that broader index.
Seeing that I think the most likely material news for Wave in the near term is a PIPE (more likely in a kinda 60/40 sense), my inner-uber-TA-SP-jihadist is left with nothing more than a “beats me” on the next couple of weeks.
I had one 3:1 that I dismissed for the 'divide by three in perpituity' folks knowing that while it is entirely unsound in defining a share today, 2012 is an election year and I wanted to be inclusive.
Seeing that we are already building SKS statues here in Waveland I'm figuring that that one share is worth $12,800 once the rather trivial (veritable fait accompli) matter of the seven splits and the $100/share works its way through the system.
:(
so I bid for 7 shares, they fill six and leave me hanging on 1?
Elitists!
I thought the point of trade-thru rule was that the market orders could not walk through a stop-limit-sell and leave them on an island with no buyers, except that AON could cause problems.
No not a AON, I thought if you had a AON they could skip over (as the ask volume may be insufficient to fill), this was not an AON. Its just one of those annoying things were its 99% filled, trades then go through below, and then it comes back through on the way back up.
I though the seller was protected in this case by the trade-thru rule (they are selling shares for less than I am willing to buy them for), but perhaps they had a AON, and after the partial was executed, I no longer could fill the sellers AON.
Doesn't the trade-thru rule make it a no-no for trades to go thru below my bid without filling my bid?
barge, I didn't address the notion of whether things were earned, I addressed whether it was "fearless".
barge, I'm all for recognition, but I see little "fearless" on pulling high six figures of cold hard (fiat) cash yearly for a decade. Fearless is where you stand to lose something, like what happens when folks take their own money and invest it in their company like so many CEOs do. What I see is not fearless, what I see is hedging (or as STATED "diversification"). Not to buzz kill or anything.
I'd short WAVX right now ...
if I could, but I can't, so I wont.
FWIW GOOG has over 7bn in debt, I hope Wave becomes debt worthy and then uses it well. AAPL is an anomaly. MSFT has 13bn in debt, INTC 7bn, QCOM 1bn, Dell 8bn, ... you get the point.
Wave lacks debt as much for not being debt worthy as much anything else. Sure, its a great thing they don't have debt now, but I for one look forward to a day where Wave can use debt instead of dilution as a means to grow the company.
msft-wave, while always deeply suspicious of MSFT,
one could imagine that MSFT every day finds Wintel to be a triumph that while still valuable, has run its course or is a bit stifling.
As everything is migrating towards cross-platform interaction and one where currently the vulnerabilities are significant (a trust-matrixy need notion), one could imagine that in extricating itself from Win-Tel towards Win-Anything that msft may see value in aligning with Wave ... the TPM(MTM/SE)-Anything of the identity component of this matrixy thingy.
Should msft decide that its interaction with the matrix need be multi-device compatible/interoperable, then it would sensibly go the TCG route (which it appears to be doing) and may find it in their interests to work closely with a selected lead player in the matrixification business in order to at once be a step ahead in functionality, interoperability, and influence with selected matrixifier.
muenchen, re:2005
in that post regarding 1bn I said "I don't see it", although I should add I haven't bothered to read the surrounding context to see what it is I was seeing or saying.
My current prediction still falls in this range:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=69111068
(November 2012: DS> $4.18-7.19 )
cartoon, not easily,
using Jan 10th (just pulling a date out of the hat) the 30 equities with the most similar short % as reported in the daily FINRA report are:
(wavx short % was 57% that day, this is the 15 equities above and below)
BSCD
JBT
JNY
LNC
BANR
MAT
KWR
HMH
BBSI
PKG
SIGI
VVC
SNA
MDF
SBNY
WAVX
HOLX
VB
ALL
K
RCMT
DENN
EDS
CpS
BKH
TZG
HNZ
OIB
TOWN
AN
JCP
Just glancing one can see some serious heavyweights ... Allstate, Kellog's, JC Penny's and some small fry mixed in.
If one sorts by total reported volume from the same source then Wave's nearest neighbors with the % short shown adjacent are as follows:
(wavx and nearest neighbors by volume, short percent shown - with waaayyyy to many sigfigs)
MERC 51.49509593
CRIS 38.49830977
CHKM 47.6906134
Z 35.90269275
UEC 35.35862337
JPS 60.80722755
C.WS.A 28.49758102
STEC 54.40208759
VB 57.4532253
MLM 47.07038819
RBSpQ 3.305004721
DVA 51.65331748
FSIN 29.19477929
FIF 37.22487049
BG 38.06506801
WAVX 57.40309714
WSH 45.47117766
PRIS.B 8.170808357
CHW 46.52571653
DRH 45.96186072
LRN 52.7502288
BBTpB 43.50827441
RY 58.7371759
DYN 49.86109557
YINN 47.49617808
API 21.29781523
DRRX 42.31607985
PCLN 35.74687599
AZPN 66.51862197
FMD 81.49909273
XING 11.13463717
Obviously the later sort biases towards equities with a similar mcap although curiously the only equity to make both lists is the 23bn Vanguard Small CAP ETF, VB.
The above list of tickers gives one a starting place to explore mcap, short ratio, percent of float. However, the FINRA SHO volume number for some equities is very near that reported on NASDAQ, while for others is represents only a percentage.
Have fun.
well somebody wants to
borrow crazywavx's bazillion shares ...
ct_yankee, if done in collusion there would be some legal issues.
barge, so the worst case scenario is the short goes bust, and can never return your borrowed shares. From what I read the loan is collateralized, but as Countrywide knows rather well, the value of collateral is subject to some, uhh, variation.
adjida, thanks, this one kinda seemed to sum it up:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-small-investors-lend-shares-to-hard-pressed-short-sellers
crazywavx et al,
I'm a bit confused by this ... my shares at E*trade (all 7 of them and hence not garnering much interest) I believe to be held in 'street name' and would expect that only those with a legal interest would be able to ever determine what I was invested in (essentially the issuing company for proxy matters), but even then I expect that E*Trade as a middle man maintains my anonymity. I tried Googling "What are Dig Space's current equity holdings" and came up with nothing.
How does 'someone' even know you have shares of WAVX short of you Facebooking your tax returns?
As a monthly fee it seems they don't just want to see your account, they want to monitor it.
This is all very weird and I would certainly welcome any insight anybody has int any of this or the details of any 'contract' anybody has seen on this matter or whether they have ever heard of such things for other equities.
TIA
bridgebuilder, short of the announcement of a relationship, there are few details regarding Acer. FWIW Q3'11 did realize the first significant uptick in SMB/bundling revs for Wave in some time. While what actually precipitated that uptick falls below the margins of specific reporting, potential Acer bundling represents an example of what may have lead to the uptick. Were that to continue then Q4 numbers from that and other such thingys could presumably yield an upside surprise. This would shrink the doughnut hole (but my SMB/bundling growth numbers are pretty generous already). Acer revs at the level you mentioned would show up in the annual as a significant customer line item, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that.
jas, agreed, since when does Wave
feel compelled to give Mr. Softy a sunshine enema?
That whole Wave Systems Corporate Blog is like some sort of Ouija board. It seems as if somebody is trying to communicate, indeed I presume somebody is, and the Blog owners know that there is a semi-rabid investor base that will parse, highlight, transpose, invert to no end .... so I'm with you ... what's with the deep bow to Softy?
awk, amazing, I'll take your word for it with no knowledge of source, but amazing. Know that I certainly would prefer Wave not need to go to capital markets at this juncture, but public information points loudly towards a need.
Wave financing (OT),
Done the math, read the blogs, the boards, and the filings. Listened to Santa, looked at RFIs, RFPs, and so on.
It is a coin toss what the next material news from Wave will be, but my bet is (>50% chance) it will be a PIPE for some $10m any day but in all likelihood before the end of February.
That should bring fully diluted to some 120m shares off the back of my envelope.
(the doughnut hole coming home to roost)
ICBW
NW, hopefully
the folks at LMT, L-3 and friends value their IP more than SYMC, a slow reacting gov, and others seem to.
weby, perhaps most remarkable about that link as wd pointed out to me a few days ago is the dateline ... 5 years ago, and in many ways things haven't budged.
edit-wavedreamer, to clarify on Samsung Tab ...
it has been my perception that the capability demonstrated in the Samsung-Tab-Wave_SED video leveraged the ARM processor (I'll leave you to parse the MTM/SE/whatever), NOT a cannonical TPM1.2 chip ... is that how you see it?
edit-much of what I found remarkable about the video was my presumption that Wave eNabled TC using ARM and Android not TPM 1.2 and Wintel, rationalizing for me some of the several references by SKS to a mobile coming out for Wave ca now. So in this case I want barge to have it wrong on Tab TPM not for my usual reasons, but rather that it demonstrates the increased breadth of Wave's products
weby, sks and NFC
SKS said Wave wasn't getting into the transactions business, but interested in securing communication. Very nebulous thing. If one was to suppose that the transactions business is a piece of software that interacts with the user (entering CC info, card selection, pin-locks) and sends/receives info via NFC then perhaps the notion is that Wave runs transparently beneath this ... verifying the device while blind to the details of the transaction.
It seems the threats are 1) a device with stolen card info buying stuff, 2) a receiver snagging the bits in NFC flight. The first could be addressed by coupling the payment info to the device, the second obviously calls for encryption, which means Diebold is going to need keys to unlock the device's broadcast, but as Diebold has no idea who wants to buy the Nerf gun, the whole known device thingy gets a little obscure to me.
wd, fancy that,
fwiw Samsung lists Sybase, Soti and MobileIron for MDM solutions for the 10.1 tab:
http://www.sybase.com/files/White_Papers/Afaria-Technical-WP.pdf
https://info.mobileiron.com/android-datasheet.html
http://www.mobileiron.com/downloads/MobileIron_Android_Product_Datasheet.pdf
http://www.soti.net/Mobicontrol/KeyFeatures.aspx