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.
Thanks, Ramspower. Good to hear!
Svenm
Zen, It may benefit bashers/traders to exaggerate the downside of a Wave loss in this contest, but I agree with you that a design win here is very important to the Wave story. I fully expect Seagate/Wave to get a piece of this pie, however small or large it may be initially. That will have very important implications going forward in terms of being able to tout a customer a number of magnitudes greater than Papa Gino's (lol)! On the other hand, a goose egg here will slow down ETS upgrades for sure. The price of the stock is so low where it is that the idea of selling (for me, at least) is largely irrelevant. No question in my mind that TCG's TPM strategy will be successful. The question remains whether or not Wave will profit from it.
JMHO,
Svenm
Ramspower, If you make it can you provide an update on Thibideau's panel discussion and the Seagate/Wave booth? That would be much appreciated!
Svenm
Weby, Re: tripartite solution. That's an interesting idea and I think you may be on to something with it. It makes sense for the various agencies that will be affected by the mandate but don't feel the need for higher level security. It gives them their "Get Out of Jail Free Card" in respect to data loss that may occur with non-hardened security. Hopefully Seagate/Wave/Dell will get their share of the pie going forward. That would be a big foot in the door for Wave!
Cheers,
Svenm
Ramsey, I would imagine some will, but the original mandate called for having the safeguards in place in 45 days. Now there is a contest for 90 days but unclear if at the end of 90 days all the safeguards must be in place immediately. Already existing software solutions could easily satisfy that kind of delivery speed. Hardware solutions will have a harder time. That, to me, indicated a problem for Seagate/Wave. However, as always, I'm sure that all these items are in reality moving targets and will, assuming hardware solutions are acceptable (and perhaps even considered superior and properly marketed, lobbied, etc.) allow for a roll-out of inventory.
Svenm
CM, Perhaps it depends on one's interpretation of "crucial." I agree with much of what you are saying. Despite the framing of the blog report by Mr. Yam, I seriously doubt that this "contest" is a winner-take-all affair. Instead, I expect a number of solutions to be considered acceptable by the judges, much as the hardware RFP is promoted that we all have been patiently waiting for an announcement of. "Crucial" to me means that the Seagate/Wave solution is acceptable (though not a monopoly) for to-be-deployed TPM 1.2 equipped machines. I doubt that would blow the lid off all 2007 expectations. Wave would then get a piece of that portion of the solution. I don't expect much, if anything, from the solution given to legacy machines. But if we don't have a shot at the new machines as they are purchased, as a result of this "contest", I would be disappointed. Nevertheless, even if that bad result were to occur, the security market is definitely expanding rapidly, and that market must develop for there to be any business whatsoever for Wave.
JMHO,
Svenm
Edit: After reviewing the Presidential mandate (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2006/m06-16.pdf) this was apparently not bogus.
Question for the board: Can Seagate FDE/Wave solution, not even commercially available at this time, effectively compete in a 90 day sprint with the available software solutions (assuming Hitachi is in the same, or worse, situation than Seagate)? I'm not competent to interpret the Presidential mandate requirements vs. software solutions vs. hardware solutions, but to my inexpert eye it seemed that software solutions meet the mandate, though they probably each have shortcomings vs. the Seagate FDE 2. Nevertheless, if the gov. were to adopt the hardware solution it is apparent that Secude software would be an important, and complementary, solution to ETS on the legacy computers for the next 4 years during the phaseout of the non-TPM equipped machines.
I have to agree with Zen, this is a crucial contest. If Seagate/Wave enjoys success, 2007 will be a very good year for Wave longs!
JMVHO,
Svenm
Weby,
Of course. That's why those longs of us still listening are here! FDE, Seagate, and Wave software solutions look like a duck, fly like a duck, and quack like a duck. But until a PR actually announces an agreement, and sales actually occur and revenues are actually booked, collected, and reported, I'm afraid none of us will really know that it is a duck!
Happy New Year to you!
Svenm
Zen,Rooster: Also from this PR: The original memo from the government intended that all safety measures were to be in place 45 days from the issue of the mandate, but according to this source, the U.S. government will conduct a 90-day evaluation of technologies to find the best solution.
If correct, I find it odd that what we know to be a very sluggish institution in regard to PC security, would suddenly wake up one day and mandate a solution in place within 45 days! What could have prompted (once again, if it is really happening)such a change? It's been a long time since the VA laptop debacle. Plus, there is no solution available that could have been in place 45 days from the issue of the mandate. Seagate doesn't have that kind of inventory sitting on the shelves and any IT department would know that. It makes me think that either this is bogus, or there is suddenly a huge push from powers outside the IT community.
JMHO, ICBW, and IBWB!
Svenm
Edit: Saw that ad on Awk's Atomic Bob board.
Svenm
Interesting. I was just reading Ispro's message and noted that a Google ad in the right margin had been inserted: Get the Most Out of Your TPM. Order Embassy Trust Suite Today! www. Wave.com
Not sure if that will sell any upgrades but that seems like a good way to help establish a brandname.
Svenm
Barge, You're welcome. I assume that Carly called you with that information, or did she deliver it in person?
Svenm
Barge, Just when I thought you were down for the count! Nice work!
Svenm
Ramsey, Thanks for the explanation. This issue is pretty clear to me now. It is interesting that noone else is stepping up to the plate with a server software solution. Every month we're alone in that space will be invaluable for future market share. Let's hope that SKS was indicating impending government purchases with his remark about HP at the CC!
Cheers,
Svenm
Awk, Thanks for that succint and crystal clear reply. That really makes that issue much clearer for me. I'm looking forward to the HP adoption of bundling and software licensing/redistribution. Perhaps both at the same time?
Cheers,
Svenm
Ramsey, Re: "If Wave wins enterprise-mandates, HP will have to look very closely at implementing Wave..."
From the Q3 CC: "Things like forcing other OEMs to interoperable tests with what might become an Army solution are really important and so I just don’t see anyone behind me right now."
Taking SKS at his word HP clearly is concerned about interoperability in regard to the eventual government purchases. Without Wave's interoperable solution can the HP machines authenticate non-HP computers? I'm not sure about this layer of trusted computing software so I would welcome the opinion of someone with that technical understanding. Surely it would be a fait accomplis for a Wave IP adoption by HP if HP's computers are not able to perform authentication and trusted verification of non-HP machines?
TIA,
Svenm
Rosie and Unclever, Thanks a bunch! I've really been looking forward to reading that CC!
Svenm
Preacherman, I concur that Schnier was negative at the time. As I remember he was representative of the "privacy concerned" group at the time and generally opposed the entire concept of trusted computing. He may be a bellwether of changing public opinion in that regard.
Svenm
It can't be a bad thing that with this PIPE despite an approximately 10% share dilution the price has risen and maintained close to a 20% increase. Close to three million shares have traded since last Friday and I suspect that most of the PIPE investors that were going to sell into the news have done so. If the revenue #'s reported next week are $1M or more we will hopefully see another nice price jump without the PIPE investors selling into it.
JMHO,
Svenm
Kite, Would you mind elaborating on why E-trade4 is "corrupt?" I recently opened an account with them and would be interested to know if it is wortwhile changing.
Svenm
Scorp, Good point and I think the best light to put this in is as a "learning experience" for Wave in subscription management. It may provide direct revenue some time (internet telephony is growing exponentially)but it sounds like a good way for Wave to get its feet wet in the meantime.
Svenm
M1S2, Nice article by Cheryl Gerber. One has to like this statement: "Rootkit is but one example of why a growing number of enterprises are moving toward the use of hardware-based TPM." I wonder what she is basing that on? It definitely sounds as if she is referring to client enterprises as opposed to OEM's. Perhaps we'll see some significant ETS upgrade #'s for Q306, after all?
Svenm
Weby, Don't let the whiners get under your skin! Plenty of lurkers like myself appreciate your DD efforts and perspectives, sense of humor, positive attitude and ability to endure. Frankly, I think it's ironic when Wave is finally beginning to execute according to management's projections that some of the previous "stalwarts" are receding to the sidelines and letting loose with the Bronx cheers! That's the easy way out as it is much more difficult to stay positive in the face of strong headwinds for such a long period of time. When Wave was pretty much by themselves leading the charge I could understand the skepticism, but now with the full strength of the TCG's members behind us, an ongoing and undeniable soon-to-be-ubiquitous deployment of hardware, a lack of serious competitors in Wave's software space, I would think that optimism would be the order of the day. In fact, I've tripled my modest holdings in the past couple of months at these giveaway prices and brought my basis down to a reasonable level.
Is that crazy? I don't think so. Given the odds I think it's a very reasonable bet and I'm prepared to take the consequences if it doesn't work out. Though I think it will!
Cheers (real ones),
Svenm
Unclever,
Thanks so much! I'm sitting here in Nairobi waiting to head for an ascent of Mt. Kilimanjaro and wanted to update myself on WAVX. What a great way to get the latest info! You're the tops!
Svenm
AWK, Thanks for the well-thought-out reply. I had the same question as Robt and appreciate your having answered his question. Derailing the TCG train is getting more difficult with every passing day.
Svenm
Snackman, I completely agree, and thanks for filling in the rest of the history there. Of course, when the numbers start coming in in Q3-4 a lot of naysayers, doomsdayers, saboteurs and doubting thomas's will be rushing in to say that it was obvious all along! lol
Svenm
Irishbob, Actually I believe "June is ours" was first generated by Snackman in response to MSFT unveiling the concept of Palladium in which they agreed that hardware security was necessary. That was a milestone for Wave and happened o coincide closely with a June shareholder's meeting.
Svenm
Lugan,
Thanks for sharing. Good to hear that the WAVX team was on the ball.
Svenm
Very nice, Snacks!
Svenm
StocWatcher, Nice effort! Thanks much!
Svenm
Doma, I hope they will turn all of them on and I hope that they cause all of them to be interoperable by using the upgraded ETS. Do I expect that to happen? Probably not. I think that though the TPM's are mandated, some will be turned on and some will be upgraded with ETS. I really don't know what percent of those machines will fall into the various categories. Do you?
Svenm
Doma, I was just pointing out that interoperability has not been mandated by the U.S. Army, whereas the use of TPM 1.2's has. A subtle distinction, perhaps, in our wavoid longs' minds. But nevertheless, despite all the trials, etc., there is a difference and "enhance interoperability" just doesn't equal Wave IT in my book.
Svenm
Ramsey,
Thanks for the input. I didn't realize that HP had gone to Broadcom for all of their 1.2 machines. If that is true then certainly the scenario of an arrangement with Wave gains greater credibility (and urgency for HP in lieu of this contract). Hopefully we'll see that come to pass soon.
Svenm
Escrow, ICBW, but I do not recollect a U.S. Army mandate for interoperability. From the Wave "salutes" PR: The new published Army specification details a requirement for desktop and laptop personal computers to be equipped with new open security chip hardware called the Trusted Platform Module (TPM). The TPM provides a very low cost hardware security solution that can be used to enhance the security and integrity of the computer.
HP meets this requirement with the Infineon chip and software. Naturally, one has to wonder how those HP computers would work with the Dell non-Infineon equipped platforms. It could mean that HP will work out a bundle agreement with Wave. It could also mean that systems interators like EDS will cobble together interoperable networks using ETS that is downloaded onto vertical TPM platforms. Unfortunately, that will be an extra step. It would have been preferable to have seen Gateway gaining, or at least maintaining, a presence in this contract.
AIMHO,
Svenm
On first take it looks like Gateway is unfortunately the big loser here. A quick scan through CDW's site doesn't turn up any Gateway desktops. It's a little suprising to me given Gateway's previous participation in these contracts. Hopefully Dell will do yeoman's work here.
JMHO,
Svenm
Rachelelise, I agree that "this is putting the cart before the horse." In any event a decent market share of an annual 250 million new PC sales market would be a pretty good start for ongoing (if not recurring) revenues. You're correct about the Norton model, btw.
Svenm
Rachelelise, Go-Kite,
In the recent Red Chip report as part of the third stage of the Wave business plan (sorry, I couldn't cut and paste this) a reference is made to upgrading of existing software as a recurrent revenue source. First time I've seen this and it makes perfect sense to me.
Svenm
Awk, Agreed. This will be a wake-up call. It'll be interesting to see who gets the lion's share of the Army small computer contract that should be announced soon. What will really be interesting, though, is to see if that leads to ETS upgrades fairly quickly!
Svenm
Ramsey & Weby, I agree with Ramsey's explanation. Those "features" are what differentiates Wave's software from their competitors at this time. As Ramsey points out, the more contracts that Wave signs with OEM's the more difficult it will be for us to be unseated. I think the situation is fairly analagous to Microsoft's at a similar stage. First-mover advantage will be decisive, as long as Wave continues to execute well. Initially I bought into this investment under the naive belief that the Peter patent would be decisive to Wave's success. At this point in time I no longer think that IP will be the decisive factor for success. Instead it will be the ability of management to cement the lead they already have. And Weby, in your reply I would say that you are asking questions concerning applications that will not be addressed by Wave. Instead, Wave's success will rely on their being able to forge relationships with OEM's based on their ability to continue to deliver 1st class trusted digital communication products.
JMHO,
Svenm
ISPRO, Thanks for the CEBIT report. Very encouraging re: subsumation question.
Svenm