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.
awk and TPT - I have also been speaking to a golf buddy down here in Austin who knows that ARM and TrustedLogic will be a very big part of the chips that go into cell phones very soon.
He's not a good enough buddy to tell me when yet
KeV and all ~
To those of you in the technology business, this is a big deal, because it is a big company lining up to secure a portion of the endpoint security dollars for themselves. They are buying these companies, and then delivering these services as their own.
However, a significant difference here is that IBM is a very, very large (and my very(s) mean something) outsource / managed operations provider. What that means is that they contract with companies for usually 5 - 10 year periods, for millions and millions of dollars, and they (IBM, HP, EDS, others) essentially run the show as to what products and/or solutions they use to run their outsourced business/responsibilities. So if they want to use their own endpoint solution over Wave's or Seagate's, or Wave/Seagate's, then they don't need to ask anyone's permission to do that in situations where they manage the assets (procurement, install, configure, capacity, grid, metrics, etc.)
What is of equal improtance is that they are announcing this and potentially beating Seagate/Wave now to the marketing punch. The time for IT'S COMING has now passed. Every day Wave and their partners procrastinate, is another day they lose business to someone else IMO. I'm not debating this either, because I know this business very well, and know that this is how IBM begins its process of controlling future revenues.
Hot Topic. Where are we?
waveduke - and nothing good is down like Wave
;0
Dutch - I'd settle for 2 - 3 times my investment to start. Even that would make me much better off, and put the stock in the $4 - $6 range on average for me.
ootonomy - Awesome post! Summarized quite nicely. eom
warbil - the government is only one contract. There better be several commercial customers as well, or Wave is in trouble anyway. While I believe your argument is a good one for the government trial,I think you argument is too narrow a focus for what should also be a budding enterprise commercial market (i.e. banks, healthcare, credit-card processing companies etc.)
oknpv - I agree. It is very simple. Where are the companies activating the upgraded seat licenses? Anyone who trials, or does a POC beyond 90-120 days without a purchase will eventually put this little company out of business anyway. To that end, we have been hearing about these trials for 2-quarters or more now. So let's all pause for some personal math.
IMO, if we don't hear news of a contract in this area by the SHM, then I will not be very encouraged over the up-take or sales-cycle that may accompany this. The fact that trials have been underway for quite some time now should, by now, begin to yield some meaningful results. Arguments can be made ~ but not everyone should require, or need a 6-month trial (or longer) to prove value, capability, and quality of execution. It has been long enough now to start questioning where these results stand.
oknpv - I remember when my portfolio used to be worth a lot more too, but that was now 7-years ago. It's time for the SP to stop moving south, and start moving north.
All we know for sure is that we continue to take one for the team. What we want to know now is, when is the team going to give something back that makes it all worth it.
Snackman - Although your questions are completely appropriate, and your optimistic speculations are an interesting read, your opinion on what might happen "very soon" is no longer good form after 8-years of it. We have all heard that for long enough now, haven't we?
Let's see it now! Otherwise, I respectfully request that you leave that part out in the future.
Genz2 - I think he was referring to the opportunity of making his investor community feel even less appreciated, while he rewarded everyone else. Just a guess :)
Genz2 - I am at the Helmsley right this minute, ironically enough. And, I have been at SHM for Wave before. I would dress comfortably, but a sports coat never huts, just in case you find yourself invited out with others.
awk - "more dillusion is coming"
A freudian slip? Perhaps....
:)
hnstabe - One has nothing to do with the other. The board needs a shake up, and some should be replaced. Of course, you can and should vote your own mind, but since you're publicly offering your opinion on this subject, I thought I'd add my own to the contrary.
Not all need to go ~ but some definitely have to, because they have not looked out for my best interests IMO.
Regards,
T123
I believe that our board has pretty well established the fact that information leaks are happening with frequent regularity to some of the largest companies in the world.
What the board has not established yet is:
1. What have the companies done about it since its occurrence?
2. Has any one of these reported incidents ever turned into even a single opportunity for Wave, and its partners?
3. Is anyone chasing the ambulance?
That's what I'd like to know ~ and I'll bet you would too. Reporting only the existence of the problem is good, but for those who see, or speak to Steven on a semi-regular basis, I'd like to know a bit more about the answer to questions #2 and #3.
Happy Mother's Day to all of you mothers out there
Weby - Fair eneough. But I'd like to bet on something old, instead of always having to bet on the latest, and newest only.
Wouldn't you agree?
wavxmaster - On these points we totally agree. But imagine this scenario if you would:
Finread and Wave begin showing up again, both in the press and in serious trial activity. Wave PRs mention no specific banks, but rather EU countries or regions where trials have begun.
To us long-time longs, the crescendo of things to come would ring very loud, and very clear. If I saw this scenario re-emerge, it would be my long-awaited sign to find as much extra money as I could and begin putting it into Wave ~ because now I no longer have to think about whether Wave is going to make it big - I'd already know!
This would be my reward for being a long-time long as only I, you, and some others on this board would recognize the holistic significance of such an event.
Just imagine.....
digspace and Weby
I apologize for jumping into your discussion, but some DS said made me feel like commenting. dig - you mention blowing it with CyberComm, Finread, etc.
Here's my take for what it's worth:
I recall Steven telling me once (and I don't speak to him often, so it's one of the few blurry memories I have) about 4-years ago that Finread wanted Wave to do business with them. But at the time, Steven thought that to satisfy the one set of customers (banks) in Finread would require him (at the time) to to do so without the support of Microsoft's power to pull him into Dell, Intel, and be an out-of-the-box offering in every PC. In short, he would be putting Wave out on an island, able to service one customer as a one-off solution using a white-box provider, but potentially alienating millions more by not being in almost every box. I believe at the time, MS was also being sued by the EU, which further complicated things.
So let's assume that I don't have the story exactly correct, with all of the right logic Steven applied. I do have the end message correct ~ in that, Steven thought that he could convince Finread banks to wait until Wave had the behemouth support he needed (being in every box) and get them to come around to his solution anyway.
This is where my reasoning for posting comes in. I don't mind hearing sound logic from a CEO who believes that the ticket to his future is in having patience, and waiting for the right timing and relationships. What I will mind, and do mind presently is that I have no further knowledge as to whether his assertions are correct, and if his logic worked as thought, because we never hear anything more on these companies, or conglomerates.
To that end, Will Wave get Finread now? Are they still in talks now that PCs have trusted vaults and Wave's software? Is Finread one of the upgrade enterprise trial prospects? These are important questions IMO, because they speak directly to Steven's ability to execute according to plan, and show that he had one all along.
If Finread is still actively pursuing a Wave-enabled solution, then I would admit to being extremely impressed with not only Steven's vision, but also his management and leadership skills. I would stand and applaud this as my validation that I invested in the right company, the right management team, and obviously, the right leader (CEO). However, I have heard nothing for years on this from Steven, yet still admit to constantly re-visiting this in my thoughts as an excellent measurement success factor in my investment.
Does anyone know where we are with Finread?
internet -
next time you address everyone, please try to refrain from responding only to a post I've made. It looks like you might be aiming some "get with it" message at me, but never really took good aim enough for me to determine what, if anything that I posted, may have forced your post.
GWS - A fair alternative that is possible ~ I will admit.
In fact, I'd rather hope you're right anyway. However, there's no reason for either of us to totally dismiss either possibility at this point (yours or mine). While I'll root for yours, we'll soon know (I say by next cc) who's is right.
zen88 - possible, but limiting your sales opportunities
Hory is a plant IMO there to use up all of the time on purpose ~ said the eternal skeptic
So let me post it now before I forget
To the best of my knowledge (and we don't know much) the enterprise upgrade trials is essentially a "try before you buy" pipeline. In my mind those in trial are, in reality, in a proof-of-concept mode, with the ultimate outcome being a sale transaction between customer and Wave ~ hopefully.
Is that everyone else's take? If not, please share others.
However, if I'm correct, then why would you want to limit the number of POC/Pipeline prospects if the desired outcome is a sale/contract with the company kicking your tires?
To me, saying you want to limit the number of these, is like saying:
1. you either don't want to grow too fast
2. it's more like alpha or beta testers more so than potential or real sales prospects
3. you don't have any new pipelined prospects aqnd the explanation doesn't pencil
Which either one it is, I'm very confused over the answer Steven gave.
Remind me to express my opinion on flat enterprise upgrade numbers that Steven tried to explain as something that he does not want to increase without being able to show some "I can't remember the right word he used here" ~ essentially saying without getting any takers, he wants to keep it stable
mbarr - I hope you're right, and I hope that Steven can provide similar guidance with some certainty. I already know that we're all versed at speculating on potential future revenues. We're just not very good at it.
Until Steven says what it should be ~ it's all just a guess that passes the time. It no longer excites me to speculate on what the future will bring, because after 10-years of being invested, the future is already the past.
:)
okay barge - I give up. Even though some board members have not been around for 15-years with WAVE. I know the Chairman hasn't. I may be distorting your issue ~ and if so, I will stay out of it.
But if your position comes down to a balancing pass/fail that measures a board on its overall performance, then I will simply say that in the "What have you done for me lately" world that we live in here, and now ~ no board member should be judged for longer than the past 1-year period.
mbarr - read some of my posts. I care
mbarr - How are we WAVE shareholders supposed to equate that to things we care about?
barge - I don't believe that for a minute. Latitude with focus and execution within the boundaries of a somewhat flexible business plan is one thing.
However, putting a stock-option plan (like this one) in front of shareholders that you supposedly read ~ when any good D-level manager could have told you after reading it that the shareholders are going to be PO'd is not latitude. It's incompetenace at its worst case, and very poor guidance from the board even in the best case.
It simply looked and smelled like someone on that board had to say "Go ahead. Let's throw it out there and see if they continue to act like a bunch of cult-like groupies, instead of investors. If they balk, we can always adjust then." Because no one can be that poor of a board member to claim ignorance of this potential outcome ~ or even likelihood. Do you honestly believe that no one on the board or the executive team ever considered the possibility that we wouldn't be very happy about it?
I think not! Which makes our message so important. They knew ~ and now they know a bit more. Next time, they SHOULD even have different people offering the advice on the board side. Then maybe they won't be so quick to allow that amount of latitude next time. They shouldn't have this time.
TraderJoe812 - I will admit that you're probably half-right in that any CEO who makes multiple break-even predictions, and then can't bring them home is probably risking their credibility, and ultimately, their position as CEO.
Unfortunately, we've always known that Wave was dependant on the marketing and sales strength of others. The missed predictions only continue to drive that sad fact home. However, as for Steven's fiduciary responsibilites, he is only responsible to tell us what he knows as accurately as he can report it quarter over quarter. And, he is allowed to speculate, as long as it falls under the umbrella of a forward-looking statement. Therefore, I don't see Steven disregarding or abusing his fiduciary responsibilities to us.
I see him struggling to find a way to control his own financial timelines (destiny), because the activities and priorities of some very large corporations are not his to control ~ yet often affect his critical path. I see him as always having the best interests of his executive team and employees in mind, because they obviously work hard. I see him as also having the best interests of his shareholders in mind, except for this last incident.
In that regard, I thing he shoud have finally gotten the message that it's time for give-get, not take, and more take. That left when they admitted to not being a development stage company anymore.
So in the end, I would say that there was no flagrant abuse of fiduciary responsibility on Steven's part IMO. Just too much dependance on the other guy, some poor or non-existent guidance from the board, and even some poor judgement.
All fixable and forgivable. Because the message they all finally got (thank god) is we're watching.
Snackman - Never mind. My bad. The post just didn't show up when I went back into Ihub about 30-seconds after I posted, yet I saw an entry number missing between two posts. It was mine, it just hadn't shown up yet.
It's there. Thanks for asking though
T123
This is very great news for many reasons.
I am not going to play the good politician here and delve out compliments everywhere so that all feel warm and fuzzy. It's not necessary, and it's not me. I am happy that performance messages were finally sent, and also received.
My hope now is that votes cast against some of the existing board members is also a clearly received message, and that perhaps some (like our current chairman) need to be replaced by someone that will push this company to achieve the success stories that, so far have often been verbalized, but too slowly realized.
We have been more than generous with our support of management in the past. And we will (hopefully) have the opportunity to be equally generous again in the future.
In my opinion, everyone did the right thing here, and there's no need to look back on it .... only forward.
may1sep1 - What?
onkpv - you have my full support to do whatever you believe is best for your shares. That's what it's all about. Thanks for sharing your view.
And WaveRider - Just for the record, because it needs to be said: I have the best interests of the Wave longs in mind, because I happen to be one of the very leveraged, and very loyal Wave long for a very, very long time. Therefore, I am entitled to an opinion that represents, at least some Wave longs.
At least 1 ;)
Robertl - thanks for the report, but I think Mr. Collins is missing the point if that's how he feels.
The fact is, Wave has been going places for the past 10-years+ now, but has never, ever gotten there from a shareholder perspective. For him to believe that we should continue the long-standing trust in Wave's progress and direction in the face of a very poor, declining share price is the point.
So let's ask Mr. Collins where Wave is going EXACTLY!
Hs Wave presented any meaningful forecasts? ~
answ: YES! they said they'd be cashflow breakeven by Q1, then Q2, and now it depends on factors (enterprise upgrades) that didn't sound like tremendous hurdles 2 - 3 conference calls ago.
Have they announced tons of OEM agreements, and partners? ~
ans: YES! But none of us know when any of them are going to start making Wave some appreciable revenues. Wave Management doesn't even appear to know. We also don't know who Wave's partners still are, or aren't anymore. Because no-one tells us anything. Is Finread still a possibility (80 million subscribers)? Where's the Realtor revenue from eSign and SignOnline? What about G&D? Juniper? HP? EDS? AMD - Stroggin? MSFT? Hitachi? Fujitsu? Wave's VARs? WXP (Freebie)? Tons more? Has any of them produced cash flow for Wave at a level that even Wave Management expected thus far. Why? Why Not? So what's the real story behind this ~ and where are they going?
Why is our share price in the mid $2 range if everything is so peachy, and progressive? Does Wave know? ~
ans: YES! It's because we make agreements with OEMs that have no min/max order quantities. So it seems, analysts don't know how to quantify that. We have had a 200k - 500k enterprise upgrade trial pipeline for the past 2 qtrs. and no one has come forward (other than Papa) to validate Wave's business model. Also, we never seem to EVER exceed the revenue targets we set for ourselves (i.e. $19m 3-years ago, and still counting), CBE by Q1,Q2, Q3 ... and still contingent on outside factors and influences. Any success criteria defined for these trials? Any definitive time periods agreed to? Or is it as open-ended as the OEM agreements?
I could go on, but the point here is not that we don't all believe Wave has a great technology, idea and opportunity. THEY DO! OKAY!
The problem here is that many of us feel like Wave has siezed every opportunity to do things for themselves, and in their best interests (ie. Founders shares, bonuses and raises during a declining share price, keeping a puppet board around, loaning money to Peter, giving brother Michael a little something), and now, a 7-year share option pool that will allow them to further reward themselves at their discretion, even though they can't even explain to their shareholders when/why they believe they're going to grow to these levels, or need these shares.
I don't know, and quite frankly, don't care about what Mr. Collins thinks, but I think it's a straw that I believe has broken the trust of even the more loyal Wave supporters ~ and that needs to be recognized and responded to by Steven quickly and openly ~ regardless of what Mr. Collins believes, or thinks out loud.
nicknamen - Here's a good start as to how to quantify it:
1. SOX non-compliance carries penalties up to $5 million, depending on the offense.
2. The Cost of Data Loss -
http://www.informationweek.com/security/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=TGLUMDIKTTQNEQSNDLRSKH0CJUNN2JV...
Top 10 Customer Data-Loss Incidents
Company/Organization No. of affected Date of initial customers disclosure
CardSystems 40 million June 17, 2005
Citigroup 3.9 million June 6, 2005
DSW Shoe Warehouse 1.4 million March 8, 2005
Bank of America 1.2 million Feb. 25, 2005
Wachovia, Bank of America, PNC Financial Services Group, Commerce Bancorp 676,000 April 28, 2005
Time Warner 600,000 May 2, 2005
Georgia Department of Motor Vehicles 465,000 April 2005
LexisNexis 310,000 March 9, 2005
University of Southern California 270,000 July 19, 2005
Marriott International 206,000 Dec. 28, 2005
Note: As of March 2006
Data: Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, InformationWeek
3. It'll cost you your job
http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/3283
Heads roll at AOL
By Martin McKeay on Tue, 08/22/2006 - 8:52am
I'm sure no one's surprised to hear that someone has lost their job at AOL over the search record debacle . Let loose the search records of 600,000 customers without properly anonymizing the data and there's bound to be some repercussions. I think my favorite headline so far is "Reason for leaving last job: Violated the privacy of 600,000 company customers". That would definitely sum up the situation of the poor drone who released the database. I feel bad for him and his boss, who were fired for their transgressions, but I feel a little less sympathy for their CTO, Maureen Govern, whose resignation probably involved some financial compensation, at least if it's like the few resignations I've seen.
I'm hoping that the other search engine companies will sit up and take notice. Google has already proven that they understand the value of their search records, but what are some of the other search engines (or at least the people who manage them) take from this experience? Will players like MSN and Yahoo take this as a warning not to let a similar incident happen to them or is some sales director in the organization see this as an indication that the information is worth selling? Given that Time Warner's stock has taken a slight hit, I'm hoping any wild ideas inside these companies will be quashed before they can see the light of day.
barge - to be fair, I see Wave as simply not performing in alignment with their financial and options needs. I see Wave as a company that needs to realize that its investors are tired of lackluster share price performance, and that asking for the kind of 5 - 7 year option plan that Wave proposes will not be approved unless, and until performance justifies it. There are other, shorter-term plans that would work for now.
Beyond that, you can spin my opinions whatever way you want.
barge - Who are we to second guess Wave management?
We are the shareholders of Wave Systems, Inc. We are the people who invested in a company in hopes that Wave could realize its business case, become profitable, and more importantly, could lift our share price up to levels that would turn a tidy profit for its shareholders.
Which part has Wave management done so far?
They have not yet proven their business case, they have not yet turned a profit, and our share price absolutely stinks!
We shareholders are tired of Wave management rewarding itself, and its employees in advance of recognizable performance. They do so, in the event that things don't transpire as many on this board have predicted (and been wrong) over several years. Wave management can always find newer investers, looking to get in for pennies on the dollars of others ~ but we can't always throw good money after bad.
We need Wave management (this time) to show constraint with their greed. We need them to perform and prove to their shareholders that they are performing. Some were quick to tout the Intel relationship as the tipping point. Others looked at Dell once Intel did little ~ thuus far.
Investing in the stock market is about making your savings grow. It's about making them grow larger than a traditional savings account would. So far barge ~ my passbook savings account is winning big time.
Management has said a great deal, and delivered negligable amounts to the bottom line. If they are about to deliver us into the promised land, then let them do so first, because I'm not investing in moses ~ I'm investing in a company that should have turned a profit by now, and has a lot of nerve missing their target on this, and then asking us to vote them even greater power. NO WAY! Perform or get replaced.
scorpio - no. I'd prefer he answer me in a public forum. I can't seem to hold him to what he says over dinner, or during private conversations.