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.
BigTim: Do you have any over-all assessments of what is happening? Any reaction to the product allegedly arriving on shelves and the subsequent downward movement? Are they unconnected, connected, relevant in any way?
TIA for any guidance you can give. You are one of the big pictures guys I would trust to give it to us straight.
Best wishes--Blue
Magdelina: That was a masterful post IMO, saying nothing--remember, I'm a fan of yours.
SKS says the product is shipping--so despite some shaky things he has said in the past, we have to assume at least there is some truth to it. And if so, we have moved beyond the "idea" stage to the product stage. Whether your version or mine applies to share price--can not be determined at this point, so we both will just wait to see.
I maintain the dropping share price is not a vote of confidence in anything related to Wave, particularly when it finally fulfills its long term promise of producing a product.
Anyway, uncertain times. Freefall. We need leadership and guidance.
Best to you--Blue
Magdelina: Good advice. Actually I do understand, on a very basic level, for a non-techie.
You write: "Share price does not reflect progress being made. You can take that to the bank." Yes, I generally agree with you. However, in Wave's case, I believe it may be different.
We are talking about something brand new on the market--not a "me-too" product. Since we are not privy to any numbers about sales and adoption of Wave services at this point, one looks for other indicators.
If the share price were not moving, if the volume remained constant that would be one thing. But when volume drops and share price drops, apparently in response to a new product entering the market, especially in the security sector--there are perhaps some very crude inferences that can be drawn, in the absence of any other indicator. This is what I have been trying to show.
The response on this board to that theory has been market manipulation, arbitrageurs at work, etc.--which may be a factor, but certainly not the full explanation.
I have been redundant on this issue and will cease and desist, per your suggestion.
As far as Barge goes, he has been predicting the eminent deployment of Wave by HWP for at least five years without success, so I discount his input as flawed at best.
What is your take on SlateColt's leaving at this particular time for the reasons stated? I felt it as an icepick through the heart.
Magdelina--also would like your take on the recent financing, if you care to provide your view.
Re: snackman--he is simply a good guy who loves this stock a bit too much, IMO and is trying to protect it. Like all of us who have loved something or someone too much, it rarely comes to a good end. (Not making any predictions here).
At any rate, it appears that serious discussion about all the relevant issues is now taking place here and I for one herald the change. Not discussing Wave's weaknesses, IMO, does not make the company stronger--just the opposite.
Do you think the current drop in share price is completely irrelevant to how Wave's chances are viewed in the market? I don't. That's why I tried so hard to find out why it was dropping.
Best wishes to you and thank you for some solid advice--Blue
Barge: At least you have a sense of humor. That's the good news.
You ask where are my posts trying to clarify whether Wave is selling and if its technology is being adopted. As you well know, SKS has declared that is proprietary info and not in the public realm.
Thus, I attempted to get some idea of how we were doing by using indirect measurement, i.e. our share price and volume. It is not a precise way to measure anything, granted, but as a very crude yardstick, the numbers are helpful.
The numbers, dear Barge, are not good. People are selling, not buying. To me that says things are not so good. If people think a technology is good, they buy. If they think the opposite, they sell. Today for instance on one of many consecutive days, we lost more ground--19 cents per share on almost 976K volume. That, with our Wave-Infineon technology on the shelves behind the Intel brand.
I don't have the adoption numbers, nor the sales numbers--neither do you. What I point to are the numbers that are in the public domain, from which may draw some very broad and some very crude conclusions. Wave is not an instant hit with the security set. OK?
If things were hunky-dory and we were looking at blue skies, what would be the reason for our share price to drift steadily down and now pick up a little momentum in its downward path?
Arbitrage? Bunk! MM driving the price down so they can load up? Bunk! What is happening is that people are losing faith in SKS saying "revenues will be substantial next quarter," and when the next quarter comes, it is projected for the following quarter. That's not me making those statements, it is our CEO.
The chickens are coming home to roost, IMO. That's why SlateColt bailed after more than seven years in this stock.
Is that histrionics? I don't think it is. I'm afraid the facts just don't support you dreamers. I wish they did. But I live in the real world and those are real dollars we are all losing. Please feel free to refute my logic and reasoning, indirect and crude as it might be. I'm not causing this stock to go down by well-written gibberish, as you insist. This stock is coming down on its own. Too many promises, no delivery.
I'm not trying to manipulate anything. We are losing real dollars. In some cases, whole futures are going down the drain. Mgt is NOT feeling our pain, are they? They get bonuses for what? In more than 10 years, the only deal they have really done was Intel--and now that is looking like a sideshow demo, a test balloon. Perhaps that is why there is a sell off.
Maybe it is being accelerated because you guys are trying to tell us what a wonderful deal this last $7 financing was. That's crap and everyone knows it. It stunk. And it stunk almost as much as the last financing deal they pulled off.
Snackman talks about me living in the past. I wish to God it were the past. Instead, the past continues right up to this late hour.
If this is histrionics, let me be histrionic. Perhaps you can show me how I am seeing things completely wrong. The reason I may be driving people like you nuts, is because you guys are saying things are wonderful and I'm saying no, they are not, and here's why. Wave is sinking. You can not pretend it is doing well. But please, go ahead and try.
Bluefang
Doma: I think I do see the big picture and unfortunately it looks like a lot of other people do too. They are selling. I am not. I'm holding. I'm not a short and not a basher. I am critical of our leadership to this point.
The big picture is not some acronymn alphabet soup--it lies in the simple questions is our product selling and is it being activated?
We don't have a definitive answer, but the early returns do not look like a runaway best seller to me. That is the big picture as I see it.
And with that, this board is Bluefang-free for a while. Children may come out of their hiding places now and cheerleaders can again gather on the sidelines to chant their happy chant.
Blue
Barge: How can one poster be ruinous? Except, I have offset the rosy, rah-rah, baseless pie-in-the-sky posts by some hard facts and reality.
I do not want to be the cause of ruining this board. Personally, I think you cheerleaders have done it, by raising expectations that everything is hunky-dory and that we are going to soar--when we don't soar, and instead drop--people feel betrayed. That's my take. If facts and simple truths can ruin a board, it could not have been much to begin with.
However, I am happy to take myself off here for a period of time, to give the board time to recover. How long do you suggest?
Blue -- P.S. I am going to answer some other posters and then I'll take a hiatus. You make the call, Barge. How long do you want me away?
$1.84 and dropping. Snack, I went outside looking for those blue skies and somehow missed them because it was raining so hard. Perhaps you could tell me in which direction to face. Looking up is not working so well for me right now.
Blue
Bravo LadyX. /eom
Snackman: It's hard to know where to start. If I raise a critical question, i.e. why is the stock going down when we partner with a giant and put the product on the shelves--you consider that a whining, negative post.
I see it as a legitimate question to be raised.
If I think the most recent financing deal was too little, too late and at too great a cost, too soon after the last hideous financing deal, you see that as a whining, negative post.
If I cite Founders Shares in response to your challenge to give an instance where mgt did not act in our best interest, you don't answer--the post is deleted and so are all subsequent posts on the topic.
When you confront me for stating mgt has made mistakes, and ask me to give an example and I cite that strange nut case PCFree-David Booth of NH receiving the $250K of shareholder money, you call that negative, whining and repetitively bringing up the past.
So, my feeling is we can probably never agree on matters involving Wave. You seem to support Wave and SKS, no matter what they do. You are virtually uncritical of any moves they have made. In your mind, getting us in the Intel motherboard justifies everything. I might be inclined to go along if our stock was soaring, but it is not. So, I look for reasons why it is not.
You see that process as negative and whining. I see it as trying to find the problem, so we can correct it. I am a long, same as you, with the same objective--to make money from Wave.
I am not a trader. I accumulated as much Wave as I could, some of it on margin (stupidly) and lost a lot of shares because of it. I blame myself only. I have no ulterior motives for questioning Wave mgt. I am not seeking to profit by pointing out their ineptness.
So why do I do it? Because I believe Wave's idea is a brilliant one and if mistakes are pointed out, perhaps they will correct them. Right now I feel as if we are marching off the cliff. Why? I have no idea.
That to me is not whining, it is a simple statement and assessment of where I see where we are at the moment.
The problem I think you face, is that you are so loyal to Wave, that anything that hints of criticism is suspect and any critic is an assassin. Not true, my friend. We both love Wave in different ways.
Your friend, Bluefang
Bravo, Toro. /eom
24601--John, hardly. You know how much I support two-way dialogues. It just seemed to go on longer than it should have. Tempers were frayed and all of us are on edge, fearing the worst.
That's all I was trying to do, to stop what seemed to be petty bickering. Of course you have a right to point out misrepresentations of fact.
It was your calming demeanor at a bad time for all of us Wavoids that I was appealing to and that I still appeal to. At a time when we should be enjoying our greatest success, our share price is falling and the end seems near. Is there anything we can take heart in at this point?
Blue
Snackman: You are taking a ridiculous position, in my view. Many of us have been quite critical of Steven's stewardship of Wave the past few years.
Just because some of the critics have been harsh in their judgement of Steven's decisions, does not mean we need to call him a thief face to face, and that our failure to do so means we are cowards. That is pure nonsense on your part and unworthy of you, who has provided much leadership for us on at least three boards devoted to Wave.
We can disagree with management; we can think them self-interested; we can think them uncaring about the investors; we can think they have made monumental mistakes in judgement; we can think they have mishandled the financing and budget; we can think they have deceived the shareholders on timetables and other matters-- all without needing to call them dishonest.
No one is hiding behind anything on this board. Cowardice is not the issue. Leadership and results are.
If you look at An Wang of Wang Labs. He was a brilliant inventor and innovator. But his skills did not include marketing. So for want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for want of a shoe, the horse was lost...and so on until Wang was forced to step aside and who assumed the reins? His son. Wang's son was even worse at most things than his father and the empire crumpled and imploded in a few short months.
People who invested in Wang and those who worked there praised the father's vision and leadership--but in the end, the kingdom fell. Dishonesty was not involved, to my knowledge. Ineptness was.
That is what I'm suggesting here. SKS may be many things, but since assuming the reins of power at Wave, he has promised many things and delivered on precious few of them. Some of us may think Steven is an out and out liar (I do for reasons cited many times) but outright stealing from the Wave treasury is not included in the laundry list of charges, with the exception of Peter's $1M interest-free loan that was not going to be repaid, until a lynch mob of shareholders revolted.
Steven and his merry band have voted themselves generous compensation plans and hearty bonuses, but that is a mistake in judgement, not dishonesty.
So please, Snackman, stop calling us loyal critics cowards.
CPA asked some very tough questions of Steven at a CC about a year ago, after identifying himself by name. He got a world of grief for it from you and the other loyalists. I believe the word heard most often was "disrespect."
A year later, it seems CPA's pointed questions were on target. CPA did not accuse SKS of personal wrong doing, he asked about pertinent issues at a time when they needed to be asked. In my mind, CPA is no coward. He's a hero for having the guts to voice the deepest fears most of us Wavoids harbored for a long time. If more of us had flocked to support CPA, instead of attacking him, SKS might have sensed a change in course was in order.
Bluefang
Alladinator posted this one late yesterday afternoon: "I see that the financing news overshadowed the triple demo news. This temporarary phenomenon will end tomorrow resulting in a dramatic increase in WAVX stock price. Count on it boneheads."
______
Well the day is far from over, but this bonehead sees things going the wrong way, dramatically.
Does this lay to rest the arbitrage theory for good? If it does, does anyone have a new theory for the continued drop on extremely low volume?
Is the game lost for good here? This is sad and depressing.
Bluefang
oknpv, you wrote: "What if Wave succeeds & instead of getting $6 mil, an investor only gets $3 mil?" Actually, the theoretical investor you cite would get about $1.2M, not $3M and that's if there is no further dilution, which there is almost certain to be.
We are in a bad place and right now it is not getting better. Our only hope is that trusted computing takes off in a hurry and Wave is aboard. I am still hopeful, but it sure looks grim to me at this point.
It would be nice if we did succeed and Wave spent some of the money on buying back stock, but personally I think pigs will fly first.
Good luck to us all--Blue
24601: I can not respond privately. The "bickering" was not a label, it was a characterization of what it felt like was going on, not a criticism of either party.
These are important days for Wave and its investors and it felt like we needed to move along, past the point-counterpoint back and forths.
You know I hold you in extremely high regard as both a fair person and as a person very knowledgeable about Wave, its technology and the field of higher finance.
I made the comment because it seemed the board was becoming Yahoo-ized and none of us want that to happen here. There are some very bitter feelings now and the sides have polarized.
We are a community and we try to help one another, despite our many differences. If Wave was trading a bit higher, I think we would not see this irritability. It is more than a little unnerving.
That's my pitch for being kinder and gentler to each other.
Blue
Snackman: I was referring specifically to Founders Shares. It had never been discussed on this board in any detail and was mentioned peripherally. You jumped in and deleted any mention of it.
There have been other topics that you said had been discussed repetitively and you would delete them, even though they were relatively new to this board. You carry an institutional memory of all the other boards, but you have to remember new people with no history of Wave come here all the time for info.
I did not mean to misrepresent anything. But I hope you will admit you do not have as much patience with those of us who feel all is not rosy at Wave. Often the posts of mine you deleted, were in response to a "positive poster" asking a question, or making a charge about something I said and I simply responded. As I did to you when you asked me to give an instance of mgt not acting in the shareholder's best interests.
I responded Founders Shares and you deleted it and all the subsequent posts about the topic.
Please accept my apologies if I misrepresented your views. It was not intentional.
Blue
SPIN-24601: Could you both please stop the bickering. Both of you have responded to each other and your positions are clear. Let's move forward.
Blue
go-kitesurf: Ignore me if you wish--I suggested it, remember? I am not focused on the attitudes of posters and I do not greet every PR with a "negative slant."
I salute good PR, as I did with Intel and IBM.
But unlike many of you in the parallel universe, I can not call something bad as good. You guys specialize in it. Let's bring some reality to this board and discuss real issues, INCLUDING the negative ones that have been off limits.
Personally, I believe Wave, despite its near-deperate situation is strong enough to withstand justified criticism. But it may not be strong enough to withstand the irrational exhuberance that some of you exhibit when things have gone from bad to worse and I know you know better.
Honesty would be a good policy on this board going forward. If someone beats something into the ground then we can ignore them. But if it is a legitimate issue, let's discuss it, good or bad.
For those who want filtered discussion, let me suggest the DD board.
Best--Bluefang
Trustcousa: Probably not. I have a conflict with a previously scheduled event. But I would be happy to hear from any 'voids who do go.
My guess is there will probably not be much in the way of info, beyond what was said at the CC. SHM's historically have not been a place where news is released. However, in the nearly complete absence of any inkling of how we are doing in terms of buyers using the Wave services, any info at all would be a plus.
You going?
Best--Bluefang
It is simply breathtaking to see the loyal Wavoids jumping up in excitment, breathing hard, responding to this paltry placement as if it were a big deal and a good deal.
$7M ?
My take is this was as much as they could get. Wasn't much, but now they need every penny.
What would be the theory going forward about arbitrage, if the stock continues to decline? Not saying it will, but should it drop some more.
To me this deal shows the plight Wave is in. Not KO'd by any means, but in trouble on points in the late rounds. If revenues are not forthcoming and forthcoming fast, we are all toast--optimists and pessimists alike.
I'm hoping for a miracle.
Bluefang
Weby: You said some honest things that needed to be said. There are issues that are unpleasant that will not go away if we pretend they are not there.
This board has not been particularly inviting to anyone wanting to discuss those things. The purifying light of sunshine can sometimes show that molehills are molehills. If we do take up some of the negatives, it is not going to force a run on the bank. People are more sophisticated than that.
Like you, Weby, I'm holding too--but it is sad to see a sophisticated investor like SlateColt who understands the technology bailing at this point. A little unnerving too.
One other point in your post: "When stuff takes off in a networked world it is not walking anymore. It is not running any more. It is a rocket."
That is precisely why I focused on share price and volume once our product started hitting the market (actually before, in error).
We are not down and out at this point. But things are not great either, despite some who would pretend they are. We have an uphill battle, and in some ways it is out of our hands and now in the laps of the gorillas.
The post Meme put up about Cisco, is a good example of just how fast the idea of trusted computing is spreading. I just wish a little more of Wave's technology was spreading. But we have a start--years later than we thought it would be--but we are in the market now with a product that certainly answers the needs of the marketplace currently. We can only wait and hope.
Weby, thank you for your very honest post. The optimism you expressed, I feel too, perhaps to a lesser extent, but I am hopeful.
Best to us all--Blue
Zen: Obviously our views differ, but not as much as you might think. When I look at the past and see men who deceived us before, I do wonder if they might do so again.
You seem to justify that kind of dishonesty as all a part of business. I disagree. If you pluck fruit from a tainted tree, the fruit often is tainted.
Yes, what the Spragues have done is Herculean, but I don't think it was necessary, right, or just to lie to the very people whose money they were using to get there. I'm not naive, by any means, and I was lied to face to face by Steven.
That is why I am wary of them. If they deceived us so easily before, what stops them from deceiving us now? If we could not trust what they said last year, how can we trust it now? Steven has a very curious way about dealing with past statements on crucial issues like revenue and deployment. He pretends he did not say those things.
When you are dealing with private placements and other financial instruments, credibility and past record are all a part of what is evaluated. That's why I think past behavior is relevant today, not because I want to keep flogging the same old issues. I want us to succeed, just like you do. But lying to the shareholders and the financial community is not the best way to go about it. And I think it quite legitimate to ask if we are being told the truth now.
I give them credit for their accomplishments, but the missteps along the way have been substantial, in my view. Don't forget we are selling a product called Trust. If the CEO is not trustworthy, how much can we ask people to trust our product?
I hope Steven and co. have brought us into the very beginning of the Trusted Computer Age. It would appear he has. But don't you think we have all reached the point where he must tell us the truth from here on out? If he says revenues in Q4, there should be some, or there should be an explanation.
If we come to the end of 2004 and revenues are not substantial, it would not mean much to have reached this point. The next few months are absolutely critical, IMO. I do not think we will have to wait for May to know whether we are succeeding or not.
You give Steven more credit than I think is due. Post 9-11, the idea of security and trust evolved quicker than it might have otherwise. The market kind of came to us, rather than we sold it to the market. We could have and should have been futher along, in my view to take advantage of the changed environment. If money had been conserved properly we would not have had that last disasterous financing .
I have 5400 shares. But because of the dilution, it is the same as having 1K shares. That's why I'm not sinking any more money into this company, until I see a different ethic and some real results.
You look back and ask yourself, who has paid for all of this? Not mgt. They got their fat salaries, bonuses and stock options. We got inflation, dilution and promises. Nevertheless, we could still come about. That's why I'm still here, waiting in the off chance they pull it off.
Bluefang
88C--I did not intentionally twist your meaning. Maybe I misread it. If I did misrepresent what you said, I apologize.
I I quoted you accurately, because I cut and pasted. Maybe what you meant was something different than what I read. If I misunderstood, forgive me--it was not intentional
Blue
Alladinator: your enthusiasm is great, but one question--did any demo anywhere ever raise a company stock price by more than a dime?
Blue
Zen: I agree it is a trader's paradise, but perhaps not for the same reasons you think.
I think it is because much of what is happening with our company, happens behind veils. In our early years there was a lot of activity and a lot of rumors of what was behind the veils, but no revenues. This leads to speculation and that's what traders thrive on.
Once we have verified revenues coming in on a steady basis, I believe it will cut down on the in and out kind of trading that has characterized us thus far.
Although, Digital River, another high tech stock I bought at about $5 has jumped around between $25 and just under $35 for the past year. They have real revenues and a pretty good business plan, but even they are traded quite a bit. So it may be a sign of the times for all stocks these days.
A trading range is one thing, but for us to be under $2 after Intel is perhaps what a free market values our chances currently. I certainly do not agree, and hope I'm right and they are wrong.
Zen, for me, the traders are a factor, but a contributory one, not the major influence, IMO. But I am not a student of the market at all. It's like your house. You think it is worth $1M. But when you put it up for sale, the highest offer is $200K. That is what it is worth at that point in time. That's how I see Wave. I believe we are grossly undervalued, given our potential, but the price is set on the free and open market and that is what you can buy our shares for right now. The ridiculous price of $1.99 T'aint right.
Blue
What the recent tech crash may have done, is to make traders out of most of us. It seems buy-and-hold may not be the best strategy anymore.
Zen: Slate was around in the early days and contributed much to the discussion on SI and later on RB. He must feel he has valid reason to sell.
IMO, he is reacting to exactly what some of us have been complaining about--expanding timelines for revenue--never being held accountable the next quarter for saying in the previous quarter revenues would begin.
But Slate can speak for himself. I find him to be extremely articulate and technologically knowledgeable. I, for one, wish he would stick around to give us his thought.
Now that he is out, perhaps he can give us what he sees is an objective view. It does seem a curious point at which to sell. And Slate, if you are still here, and you are inclined to share, what was it that made you pull the trigger at this point. As Zen said, finally they are shipping product.
Best wishes wherever you go. Your voice will be missed here.
Fondly, Bluefang
Go Kitesurf: Please do not remove yourself from this board. We are all invested in Wave and we need all opinions.
I'm not sure I agree with your definition of what this board is supposed to be. I see it as a forum for all of us, not just the ones who agree with one another.
Feel free to start your own board and make it subject to your own rules. The strength of this board lies in its diversity. Your characterization of what CPA and I do as repetitively posting the same thing over and over is simply not true. You may perceive it that way, because you do not want to hear what we have to say.
In this case, kindly place us on ignore and you will not be troubled by our presence.
Just a note--that from my perspective, it seems the same way, that you guys repetitively post the same rah-rah stuff.
If you want a board where you talk only to yourselves, please create one. But with the perfectly adequate ignore button on this board, there is no reason for you to repetitively complain about those of us who do not look at the puzzle and come up with the same sunny view you do.
To me, the call to shut out Bluefang, CPA, HhH and others smacks of insecurity. You fear we might be right. It must be annoying to you that we are here to straighten you guys out when you say mgt has always done the right thing at the right time and always to the benefit of the shareholder. It must be maddening for those of you who say things are great, when we point out the share price is dropping like a stone and give our reasons why we think it is. Reality can be such a terrible thing.
I certainly consider your viewpoint, even though I usually disagree. I suppose it would be too much to ask reciprocity. I am a long, same as you. I want Wave to succeed same as you.
But unlike you, I am not so sure we are going to succeed with the present mgt. I see these as two perfectly legitimate divurgent views.
As long as we are courteous to one another, what does it matter what our opinions are? How do they detract from your message? We don't--we present another side, another perspective to consider.
But I'm sure you feel you can decide for all of us what we can and can not consider here.
I'll continue to fight for your right to post sunny, optimistic, forward-looking posts, even though you would deny me my right to post. Simple solution--if you think our opinions stink, ignore us and go your merry way. Or go create the perfect board where dissent never raises its ugly head.
Bluefang
Bluefang to all: There is no need for another board. This one is just fine. Many of us are stressed by the decline of our stock, which may be a temporary thing. Let's not disintegrate in a moment of stress.
This board is a place where we gather to discuss the subject at hand, in this case, Wave.
We listen to praisers, critics, dreamers and pessimists. It is in the full range of discussion that we all gain. That means considering viewpoints opposed to your own.
This board has a very valuable ignore button which functions to stop you from having to view any posts from a person you do not wish to read, or the replies to that post.
To suggest we arbitrarily we limit our discussion to subjects which are "approved" by our leaders here is to endorse censorship and thought control. It is unnecessary. Critical opinions should be sought and valued if they make sense and discarded if they don't. It is that simple.
On this board, posters may not have multiple identities as has been suggested. The fact that there are multiple critics raises the possibility that not everyone is as satisfied with the way things are going as perhaps some of us would like.
We live in a society that prizes dissenting voice. If we allow those voices to be silenced because they are unpopular, we lose what is the defining part of our society--its very freedom.
We do not need a storm trooper mentality here. A healthy discussion is a good thing, even when the subject being discussed is unpleasant and unpopular. If the bashers are wrong, they will be proved wrong and will have no credibility.
My vote is in favor of continuing to allow all voices, not just the ones who think Wave is ideal and its mgt can not be improved upon. I listen to you all, with a few rare exceptions. In return, no one has to listen to me. Some opinions are more valuable than others. But can't we let the audience make those decisions? Do we need a "parent," however well-intentioned, to decide for us what subjects we can or can not discuss--which subjects are "fit" for us? I think not.
Bluefang
Snackman: It seems unfair of you to summarily declare a subject is off limits. To my knowledge, that subject was never truly discussed on this board. It certainly was elsewhere, but not here.
See Lucky's previous post, inquiring about it. Many newbies do not know and are they not entitled to learn on a board dedicated to the discussion of all things Wave-related?
Why may we not discuss all aspects of Wavx? Because you said so?
When you risk driving away someone as solid as 24601 who is as loyal as he is courteous, something is seriously wrong. 24601 is the beating heart of intelligent, knowledgeable Wavoids.
Please do not make quick decisions in anger. He is too valuable to lose. If he goes, I go--which may solve many of your problems. Any other volunteers?
Respectfully--Bluefang
CMF: I agree that our $250K investment in tinfoil hat fellow was among one of Wave's biggest boners--but the question was actually what move had Wave mgt made, that was not in the best interests of our shareholders?
The PCFree move, as incredibly wrong as it was, at least was undertaken in an effort at deployment, which would have benefitted the shareholders, had it been successful.
Founders Shares, on the other hand was nothing more than a greed grab, IMO and is utterly indefensible by a mgt team who already paid themselves exhorbitantly, gave themselves bonuses for vaporous accomplishments and already held millions of shares.
Blue
Bingoman--If you really believe Founders Shares were in the shareholder's best interest, there is nothing more I can say to you. You might want to consult with some of your friends and let them straighten you out. Even some of the most loyal Wavoids' stomachs were turned by this particular episode.
I know you are loyal and you believe everything that comes out of Lee, but Founders Shares was a bit much to swallow. It gagged more than 95% of us. And if it was such a pleasant pill for us shareholders, why did they never comment on it or explain how we benefitted? Because WE didn't. THEY did.
I know your bent is on loyalty and maintaining an unquestioning stance--but if you really check this one out with an open mind, you might then wonder what else could possibly be in there.
But I suspect you'll just turn and say to yourself, "Bluefang, he's a basher. What he says has no merit."
Bingoman, in the history of Wave mgt's Hall of Fame Mistakes--this one takes center stage. Hope you make the effort to educate yourself.
Best wishes--Bluefang
Snackie: Sorry, I indulged in a little hyperbole. It must be catching. Achoo!
We'll chat again in a while. By the way, I do appreciate your efforts at holding this community together, at considerable expense to your time and family. You are the greatest bartender we've ever had. But that doesn't mean we can't disagree and still be friends.
Snackman, here's to the sincere hope we can soon laugh about all this, as we hoist our champagne glasses, courtesy of Blue. I promise it will be the good stuff--no Korbel, not that there's anything wrong with it. It will be the high end French bubbly.
Best to everyone and a good night.
Blue
Snackman: Let me answer your no comment with two words. "Founders Shares." Was that in our best interest?
Blue
Snackman: Probably no more tired than you get repetitively saying how we are going to soar to the moon, just you wait.
At least, I try to attach the odd fact now and again. And I try not to make mistakes of typing, or spelling. It only gives the loyal Wavoids like yourself more ammo, not that they need any.
But isn't this board supposed to be about Wave and not Bluefang?
Shouldn't our discussion focus on what is happening or not happening with our beloved stock?
You cited arbitrage as a possible explanation for what is happening. Some of us feel that may indeed be in play, but does not fully explain what is at work here.
Re: Your oven full of crow--you know I will be happy to stand up and eat it publicly and have said so many times. But you have been printing up my crow menu for about three and a half years now and so far, I haven't had a morsel.
Snackie, nothing would make me happier for you to be right, and for me to be wrong. Can you give an absolute deadline of when it should be starting to happen, and if it is not by then, say next May 15--would you be willing to consume a little crow?
What about one little bite for every time you said "June is ours" or "we're going to be celebrating," or "we are all going to be very happy." Could be quite a meal, Snackie. That's a lot of genus corvid.
In the meantime, what say we man our respective trenches and fire the occasional shot at each other while we wait for the war to be over one way or the other. I'd still love you, Snackie, even if you were wrong--dead wrong.
Your pal and ever-constant thorn in the side--Blue
2B--It's kind of hard to separate the Spragues from Wave, both literally and figuratively. I don't think they have always operated with our best interests at heart, is the kindest way to express it.
No need to enumerate the other beefs with them, that's been done many times.
I do give them credit for the current Intel deal, which is major, compared to anything else in our past. But let's not forget that about four years ago Wave and Intel were at the table negotiating and SKS overplayed his hand, according to my sources. Intel walked away. And what followed was the Haup card, the dongles, and many other strategies that simply did not catch fire.
Granted, that was a different time and a far different atmosphere, but it is also true the deal or a deal with Intel could have been struck four years ago and we would not have had to be going through all this present agony, uncertainty and dilution.
I think SKS and PS in the past have been prone to hype a non-existent product and to promise deployment of what essentially was a design, not a product. I think those mistakes of the past continue to stay with us and as a result, I think Wave is not taken seriously today on Wall Street as perhaps our situation would merit.
I think we lost credibility and have had trouble regaining it with the people that count the most. And that that continues to hurt us in the present.
Could we have done better with someone else at the helm? How could we know? If someone else were at the helm, we might not be still paying for accusations of rampant nepotism which appear to the outside world that mgt values blood ties over competency.
Obviously this is an exercise in arguing hypotheticals and I'm not sure that is productive.
No reason to go to the laundry list of what Bluefang considers major mistakes, but let's talk about the present. The stock is barely above $2 and dropping. No analyst is covering us. Why is that, if we are indeed a force to be reckoned with? Our financial position could be worse, but only if we were in Chap. 11. The dilution has been severe and in my mind, not all of it has been necessary. A little frugality on mgt's part would have helped. Why did we have 3 or 4 offices when we didn't have a product?
When hard times came that were certainly not Wave's fault, why didn't we cinch our belt a little tighter? Other companies did. We felt the pain, but our leaders continued as if the money would hold out forever.
I certainly do not want to relive the past at all. But, it was the same mgt steering our ship back then, who is steering it now, except the son has taken the father's place.
If my concerns about past behavior are legitimate, it seems logical to consider that people who did not behave well then, may not behave well now. Of course if you feel everything has been hunky dory all along, I can certainly understand how you think I am a Chicken Little, or am concentrating only on the negative.
Although I have been lumped in the same category as Howie and CPA, I differ considerably with them about how I view our chances. I am cautiously positive about our future, but it disturbs me no end to see what is happening currently in the market, for reasons stated here too many times.
I'm not sure I've answered your question, 2B, but I gave it my best shot. Now it is your turn, or anyone else's, if they find these issues worthy of discussion.
Best wishes--Blue
Alrightalready: Because there are no Spragues available for this job who have this ability. Seriously, how common is it for someone in a leadership position to see his shortcomings in communication?
And who is going to tell him? Mr. Feeney? His Dad? His brother? The Board of Sweetheart Trustees who forgave the $1M loan to Peter? SKS thinks he is doing fine.
Welcome to the board former lurker.
Bluefang
CPA: Let me take a stab. In some ways, the company Wave is like a friend or acquaintance. He borrows money from you and says he will have the wherewithall to pay it back at some point in the future. But he doesn't.
Instead, he asks to borrow more, citing reasons why his plans did not come to fruition and he tells you he is inheriting money within the next year.
You give him the additional sum and when the year passes, you again approach him for the money and now he says the will is tied up in probate court. But if you would lend him a little more, he has a business opportunity which would allow him to repay you with interest. You agree and give him the money.
This cycle continues for quite a while, without the person ever paying back the money, nor earning any. How good a risk is this person to loan money to again? That is really the issue for Wave.
IMO they spent money foolishly when they had it--on themselves in the forms of exhorbitant salaries,bonuses, personal loans, stock, apartments, cars, etc. In return they have made many promises and have issued many promissory notes (dilution).
Now that they really need more money, they are up against their past reputation as not being as frugal as they should have been, as not keeping their previous promises to the investment community or to the shareholders, as not being too swift in the last go-round of financing. How likely are they to raise the money they say they need?
If you were someone with a lot of money and your business was loaning it out with the expectation you'd get it back, plus some, would Wave be your candidate?
Bluefang
24601: John, you said it more succintly and more concisely than I did. Agree 100%. Thank you for speaking in favor of each of us being allowed to express their opinion.
Highest regards--Blue
go-Kitesurf: Sorry to contradict your reverie. If Wave dropped to a dime I wouldn't buy more. 5400 shares is enough for me. I am not trying influence price or manipulate in any way. I am not in the market for more shares at any price.
Why do you have such lack of respect for the others who come here to read the posts? Don't you give them credit enough for being smart enough to figure out who's full of it and who is not?
If the issues I raise have merit, let's discuss them. If not, let's move on. A number of you have already dismissed them, and that's fine. But please, don't accuse me of conspiring to twist and warp the young minds of those too confused to know the difference. It is not the case at all. Just the opposite.
If what you and your friends say rings true that will be persuasive. If what someone else says rings true, that will be persuasive. Let's let those who come here to read about Wave judge for themselves. We both have a voice and people can listen or not listen to whomever they want, as they choose.
It is pretty clear to me who is trying to manipulate and is trying to affect the share price. And it is not the undersigned.
Bluefang
Bluefang
Zen: Don't want to argue with you, because you would never admit the point, anyway. However, let me answer your question with a question. If the Intel deal is so huge, why are we a little above two bucks?
I'm not a chicken little. YBut you, my friend are Mary Poppins. You see a silver lining in every cloud. Some of us see a cloud, we expect rain. If it did rain, you'd call it liquid sunshine.
I suppose it is a matter of perspective. If you had been promised as much as we have been promised and taken delivery on so very little of that--were it some other stock, you might be a little wary too. But with Wave, down is up--weakness is strength and when the CEO keeps adjusting the timelines for revenues and deployment, you lap it up and say, "Yea! No problem, Steverino."
Sorry if I am a little bit more independent than that. Like Tampa, why not just put me on ignore. It is clear I annoy you and I don't want to annoy people.
I have not said the sky was falling--I merely pointed out that while you Wavoids list all this great stuff that is happening, while the CEO stumbles through a CC spouting techno-babble and saying nothing, while our tech is going out and is apparently being adopted, our stock is dropping. That was my only point. The sky is not falling. Common sense would seem to dictate we should be headed up, not down--that volume should be increasing, not decreasing.
You are the ones overreacting to this. I am not obsessing. It is a curious artifact that I believe should be investigated by us the shareholders. For you guys and gals with the blinders on, just stay on your predestined path. Some of us prefer to keep our eyes open for unexpected turns in the path, a tripwire, a beartrap, etc. because something does not add up, IMO.
I am not issuing a call to mutiny or anything of the like. I asked if anyone had any good reasons or theories why what is happening to our stock, is happening. The arbitrage statement was one of the answers. I just do not believe that explains it. Now if you want to bounce off the walls and try to indicate I said something more inflammatory than I actually did, go ahead. It was a good question for those of us who think it is a good idea to raise a question or two on our way to ubiquity and complete world domination. For you closed-minded cheerleaders, it is irrelevant and a waste of time. Well, don't waste your time. You see the future clearly, right? You predicted our stock would be down around the $2.25 level by now, didn't you?
Go back and read the Smart Money article--this time try it with an open mind. This was written by an outsider examining us (before Intel, I might add). His diagnosis: delusional. Well, put me in that delusional category, because I still believe in Wave, but I would still like to know why, when we are in the sweet spot, our stock is sinking. OK?
You guys think that anyone who raises any questions at all is a basher--not true. You polarize the debate and stifle real discussion. That does not help any of us. The more we understand and comprehend about Wave, how it works and whether or not it is gaining traction, the better we can make investment decisions. But I know I'm talking to a stone wall, or perhaps something even denser.
You guys have been predicting blue skies and warm sunshine for months, if not years. Well, Zen, I'm shivering a bit from an unexpected backdoor cold front. You, of course, will see that as proof of how we are gaining traction in the marketplace. we differ. Let's move on.
Bluefang