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.
hey allan
nice post, but it's also worth noting that the Williams sisters and Gisele are repped by IMG (as are a TON of other athletes (incl. Tiger Woods), celebs, models, etc).
IMG Models is arguably larger than Ford (incl. Tyra Banks) & the entire combined company is huge (privately held, but worth $Bs).
if Warning intends to get into the agency game beyond models (& Malia Jones is a great first step IMO), they will be contending w/IMG on the athlete/model side & Octagon (publicly held -- subsidiary of Clear Channel) on the athlete/musician (rep John Elway, Anna Pornakova, etc.) side -- FYI.
http://www.imgworld.com (model site under construction)
http://www.octagon.com
regards.
so if TCG RAND permits equitable sharing of IP, what makes Wave the Holy Grail?
What barriers to entry (if any) does Wave possess?
What precludes other more well financed enterprises w/greater penetration, credibility & human capital, from co-opting & marginalizing Wave as an "also ran" by using their licensed tech?
in such an instance, how does Wave become a Qualcomm?
or do they muddle along at the fringe of TC & survive on licensing revs but miss the big gusher?
secret sauce!
Snack, c'mon man!
you won't lose every penny -- there's no debt, remember?
Team Sprague will find a way to keep the lights on for years to come IMO. if they were to "go dark" they couldn't keep printing the paper & gorging on ridiculously greedy, gluttonous "compensation."
one thing you & ostensibly most voids don't get is that it ain't about YOU... it is about the company & the way it has been (mis)managed over the years.
i do have a few gripes about wavoid culture in general, & a few individuals in particular, but those all pale in comparison to my views of how this public company has been run like a private piggy bank for years & years & years.
good luck Snack -- consider diversifying.
pink sheets wouldn't be the next logical step IMO.
they might bang around fer a while on the OTCBB first.
though the fact that pink sheet companies typically don't report to the SEC might be an especially attractive feature to mgmt.
http://pinksheets.com
it's not where you start, ronle, it's IF you finish!
"dangerous" is a CEO publicly claiming to the only analyst providing coverage that the publicly traded concern will do revs of around $19M (near the end of the reporting period, mind you) & then the company actually reports revs of about 4% of that previously represented guidance.
do you think anyone invested in the stock of that company based upon that representation?
or maybe for a more recent example -- when a CEO claims that same company will do breakeven revs w/in the year & only a few weeks later backs off that claim & revises it to something on the order of two years later +/- b/c the company forgot to factor in increased SG&A costs of global dominion?!?
that, IMO, is "dangerous."
but not to worry b/c in the future the forward looking statements safe harbor may not shield that company & its execs b/c stocks which trade on the OTCBB are excluded from that provision of the PLSRA pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(51), and Rule 3a51-1 thereunder (if i'm not mistaken).
but hey, open all yer windows & let that breeze flow!!!
surrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre it was.
"my post last night (April 1) about selling 100K shares of WAVX was just a seasonal joke. April Fools..."
look on the bright side wavoids, on 04/04/03, wavx traded at the current 52 week low -- $0.76.
but as the calendar moves foward, that old 52 week low will drop off the charts & the opportunity to make a new low will present itself.
seize the opportunity wavoids!
Weby -- wavx @ $50 again?!?
that would be TWICE the market cap as it was when it went there on the Bain PP/AMD HYPE.
the bubble burst in 2000.
unless you meant $.50, which of course could easily hauppen before the end of the next no-revs Q (& wavoids' net worth will be cut in half yet again).
gotta give Spragues credit -- they sure knew when to dump paper over the years.
just noting how people are now disclosing things...
i am, was & always will be WAY more honest than the vast majority of hucksters & carnival barkers who wake up every day to sell some newbie on the Wave "dream."
Snack, it feels *great* not owning wavx.
btw, as to yer earlier remark about Wave being better off than Trump Casinos b/c Wave has no debt -- while DJT carries a burdensome bond debtload, at least that company has tangible assets & cash flow.
Wave is barely above "shell" status IMO.
maybe Spragues always knew to stay away from taking any debt b/c then they could keep the printing presses well oiled & running efficiently?
btw2, i no longer think Wave has any chance for any of the success that was once hyped... maybe they survive, but IMO you will NEVER see the wealth you have dreamed of year after year after year after year...
how many lives did Spragues destroy w/avarice?
what will hauppen if those claims are put before a jury?
eamonnshute (aka McFadden) is in the minority who had the wisdom to dump most of their positions into the froth of yesteryear -- much like 24601, who according to a recent revelation of his on yahoo, effectively shorted wavx w/puts.
funny though how these disclosures only surfaced recently.
IMO SKS will never find another exec job in tech when this is all over & Peter's reputation as one of the builders of NSM will only be a footnote.
as for Trippi, wouldn't he too be one of those "stupid spaghetti slurping cretins" eamonnshute?
SPIN
PS sorry e-comm -- you always seemed like one of the good guys who unfortunately just got sucked into the HYPE.
2d highest down volume since SEC investigation announced:
"Just watch the volume."
http://www.stockta.com/cgi-bin/analysis.pl?symb=WAVX&num1=27&cobrand=
today's "inverted hammer" looks a lot like a teardrop.
lower highs & lower lows.
SPIN
PS SO, why didn't Wave fully disclose exec compensation in the 10K?
past is prologue?
TH maybe -- "watch the volume."
btw, it was the Bailey Building & Loan...
directed by one of those "stupid spaghetti slurping cretins."
It's a Wonderful Wave.
He Haw.
Next Stop Pottersville?
"We've been here before."
you sure have -- last year when Peter resigned as CEO. congrats, you have completed the round trip!
btw, wasn't Breakeven-Steven smart to only finance a half year @ almost double today's price?
some might even say he's a genius.
whatever you say shute...
SO, based on your standard, go-kite was simply off base when he took offense to all the Ukranian jabs?
is any other ethnic schtick off-limits?
or is it all fair game?
how 'bout racial humor?
or religious?
etc.
as long as it was in a film, it's okay... right?
SO, as long as it's a quote from some other source, that alone, makes it kosher?
if you say so...
oh yeah, that's hilarious...
what if instead of "you stupid, spaghetti-slurping cretin" it was, "you moronic matzo-munching malcontent" or maybe, "you retarded whiskey-guzzling leprechaun"?
etc.
etc.
etc.
would it still be funny?
whatever,
SPIN
PS why didn't Wave fully disclose executive compensation in the 10K?
Warning! stickers on her new book?
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/parisbook2.html
WLD - it was 24601 who bought puts, not HhH.
howierd is way too conservative to use options IMO!
keeps most of his hard-earned coin in silver certificates circa 1944, randomly buried in Folgers cans & mason jars all over the back yard!
24, then why did the founder (& former CEO) go on the record w/Smart Money in the "Wave of Delusion" article stating that he sold 100K shares of wavx into the pump?
yer queries about why he didn't file a form 4 are duly noted, but does it concern you that he claimed to have only sold 100K in that article, yet the SEC disclosures indicate he actually sold 500K shares?
SO, why the discrepancy?
a link to the Smart Money article is available at this former Wave employee's blog:
http://homepage.mac.com/edahand/iblog/B1323778479/C590598292/E905065596/
& btw, why didn't you ever disclose to the Wavoids that you were effectively short wavx? just noted on yahoo that you claimed to have acquired puts during the P&D... first i've read of that from you.
isn't that heresy among the zealots?
http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=19864721&tid=wavx&sid=19...
btw, you seem sorta angry lately... haup things work out for you!
will Paris promote WNMI?
The Bookseller
Nicholas Clee on the latest news from the publishing industry
Saturday February 28, 2004
The Guardian (UK)
"In the Observer last Sunday, literary editor Robert McCrum bemoaned the increasing reliance of publishers on synopses of proposed books. Still, a couple of synopses, circulated through a US website called http://www.thesmokinggun.com , have been providing wicked amusement recently. Paris Hilton, the model and heiress, suggests the cover of her book should read: Warning! If you open this book, you expose yourself to the dangerously fabulous lifestyle of Paris Hilton. Proceed at risk of extreme envy - and strong impulse to emulate."
http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,1157955,00.html
look like it IMO.
100K = 500K?
Board of Protectors
In 2001, certain executives took out big personal loans from the company to pay various outstanding debts. Wave's board later approved bonuses matching the amounts of some of the loans executives used to pay down their debts — a maneuver similar to the one at the heart of the Tyco International (TYC) accounting scandal, which has resulted in criminal indictments of three Tyco officers who, prosecutors allege, used the company as their "personal piggy bank." The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 made the practice of granting personal loans to officers illegal.
Wave made a loan of $250,000 to the company's chief financial officer, Gerard Feeney, in 2001 so he could pay capital-gains taxes on exercised Wave stock options. After extending the due date on the loan in 2002, the company approved a bonus on March 27, 2003, "in an amount equal to Mr. Feeney's obligations with respect to such loan and accrued interest," according to Wave's 2003 Schedule 14(a) proxy filing. Feeney repaid the loan with the funds from the bonus.
Wave also made loans in 2001 to then-Chairman and CEO Peter Sprague totaling about $1.06 million — during a year in which the company lost $48.7 million and saw its stock price plunge 40% to $1.33. In 2002, Wave's compensation committee approved a payment of a bonus of $174,391 so that Sprague could repay part of the debt. This left Sprague owing $999,518. On March 31, 2003, Sprague resigned as chairman and chief executive and assumed the CEO post of Wave subsidiary WaveExpress. His son, Steven Sprague, was named CEO. The company put in place a loan-loss reserve against the elder Sprague's debt in a Nov. 15, 2002, 10(q) filing with the SEC, essentially forgiving the loan.
Then, on Aug. 5, Wave announced that Sprague would repay the loan in full. Why would he pay back a debt the company had already written off? Look no further than the company's skyrocketing shares. "Before [the run-up], the stock was under a dollar," says the 64-year-old Sprague, who served as chairman of National Semiconductor (NSM) from 1965 to 1995. "I saw a window of opportunity, and it was trading in such huge quantities that selling 100,000 shares didn't make much of a difference."
"He just wanted to put [the issue] behind him," says Wave spokesman David Collins, of Jaffoni & Collins, a PR firm. "The loan wasn't only a problem for the company from a cash-flow standpoint, it was increasingly a problem from a shareholder-perception standpoint."
http://yahoo.smartmoney.com/onthestreet/index.cfm?story=20030826&afl=yahoo&pgnum=2
Wave reversed the reserve previously established with respect to notes receivable from Peter J. Sprague, Wave's former Chairman of the Board, of $999,518 during the year ended December 31, 2003, because the notes were collected in the third quarter of 2003. These loans were previously reserved for during the fourth quarter of 2002, because at the time there was substantial doubt about the ability of the borrower to repay these loans. In the third quarter of 2003, Mr. Sprague sold 500,000 shares of Wave Class A Common Stock, and was therefore able to repay the loans and all accrued interest thereon with the proceeds from such sales of Wave's Class A Common Stock. Mr. Sprague resigned as Chairman of the Board of Wave as of March 31, 2003. Mr. Sprague was subsequently appointed Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Wavexpress. Consistent with the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Wave has adopted a written policy prohibiting future loans to officers and directors.
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001047469%252D04....
let them eat cake!!!
im - collectively -- credibility.
wavoids thirst to discredit any critic of the BofD you love, or of My Three Spragues, yet they generally fail to acknowledge the litany of statements which have never even come close to fruition.
i ask you to cite factual support for yer contention (which is what you demanded from me, oui?). you simply pointed to opinionated conjecture.
re: $5 by 4/15 --> yeah & monkeys might fly out of my butt @ any moment & it would prolly hurt.
it's no where near $5, it has an obvious downtrend line place & it did get to $5 again, shorts will come out of the woodwork (which is why my sells in august were in the high $4s).
so i should "stick to the facts" & you, or presumably another other wavoid are free to play w/all the dots in candyland?
there is NO evidence to suggest that Wave has unlimited access to cash & there will invariably be yet another "going concern" warning coming soon.
miserably shute... i don't know anything.
yer right, the TPM chart, which is a mere collection of publicly available info from other sources is completely "creative" within the meaning of copyright doctrine.
maybe the blue boxes are ostensibly worth protection?
no doubt there is quality, it lacks the requisite creativity IMO.
it is akin to a phone book as a collection of info extracted & copied from other sources.
it's a good chart, it just doesn't garner a copyright under U.S. doctrine IMO.
btw, you don't even need the notice to have a copyright vest. you do, however, need to register it w/LOC in order to have standing to enforce any putative right IMO.
& if im01 wanted twice as much as he received, it's currently available at around a 33% discount M-F.
jakes dad - i won't resort to attacks in reply (just as i did not in reply to im01's attack), but i have seen yer posts elsewhere & consider you among the more egregious of the machiavellian moral relativists fyi.
& i'd bet you are waaaayyy underwater right now @ just over a buck.
enjoy that 10K chief.
btw, didya bet l'il Jake's college fund on wavx?
SO shute he only took half the loss!
he owns it at $1.90
closed at $1.32
did he guess he would be sitting on a 33% +/- LOSS right now?
i also know enough about class action litigation to know that 99% of wavoid posts on the subject are clueless & that these dozen or so claims against them (incl. 3 derivative actions) are much more serious than any void will seemingly allow.
btw, your recent posts have been quite sober & realistic. hard to get too disappointed when one realistically manages expectations.
btw2, i don't think you can claim a copyright for collecting TPM info. Feist established that "sweat of the brow" is not akin to artistic creation. but all the same, yer chart is a good resource & i'd guess many appreciate the effort.
we shall see.
the 10K is imminent & i suspect you will see unprecedented cautionary caveat emptor disclaimers. moreover, Wave is obligated to disclose all of its largesse to its prinicpals in that audited document. should make fer some spinteresting reading!
also, responsive pleadings are all due soon & they too might be quite telling IMO.
you write "plenty of money available" -- please cite the factual source/s for such a nonsensical proposition. the heard it from Zen's friend variety don't really count 'cept for to mollify nervous voids.
btw, why haven't any TCG members made any investment in Wave? please don't just parrot SKS nonsense about how difficult it would be for Intel to buy a publicly-traded stock either...
sorta like the nonsense from the SanFran lunch bunch about how SKS reportedly said it wasn't possible to name a wavoid to the BofD b/c the inst. holders wouldn't stand for it! well, MMC is doing just that (worth $25B). Vanguard & Barclays are two of its largest inst holders.
i assume you are aware that Wave already went through the $122M raised by selling stock @ $34/sh in 2000.
also, if "plenty of money available" is true, why did Wave do that awful PP last Spring? & if this river of cash is available to Wave as you claim, why do they consistently wait until they are running on fumes to float another Printing Press?
if Wavoids "stick to reporting facts" there would be almost nothing left to discuss in that Wave hasn't exactly been overflowing w/information for that last 4 months. sorta seems like a "foxhole mentality" IMO.
as for looking "very stupid when you try and guess."
i tried & guessed & sold all wavx during the Q3 CC @ $2.40 b/c Breakeven Steven started his smoke & mirrors show.
was that a stupid move?
betcha D&O (who may have bought some of my shares) doesn't think it was all that stupid...
rach, as a recovering wavaholic, things look different through shattered rose-colored lenses.
such sobriety leaves one w/the "fool me twice, shame on me" mantra.
lost a substantial amount of money in wavx back in 2000 b/c like many here, i held & held when i shoulda bailed b/c it was always just another 2 Qs away.
it now appears that mgmt has acknowledged that they were nowhere near success back then, but you can bet that damn near every wavoid though differently b/c of the HYPE.
SKS even went so far as to publicly reaffirm a $19M rev forecast to the GROW analyst that was proven to be ridiculously wrong & he did so @ the end of the pertinent period.
& that requires no IMO.
it is a FACT.
PS as for "more skeptical than one can be," i'm not holding any puts, nor am i short...
you see yerself sitting on a big pile of Euros as a certitude, i see it as a slim, SLIM possibility.
Spragues have proven their ability to keep a leaky boat afloat over 16 years (10 of which as a public concern).
but you ain't getting a > $1B market cap w/out massive acceptance of Wave's tech & services/applications.
doesn't matter how many dots you post, if it did, barge would be loaded by now!
& if everything was as you claim it to be, why haven't any of Wave's purportedly bestest buddies (i.e., Intel, IBM, NSM, etc.) offering any financial solutions to their current quandry?
heck, AOL once owned a sizeable chunk of wavx, but they dropped it years ago...
GEt what Nostra?
i have posted time & again that Wave might survive the mess they created (IMO), but the stuff you've been posting about a guaranteed $0.50/unit is NOT what Wave was s'posed to be all about in prior biz models.
monetizing the service component remains totally unproven & the scant data that does exist (e.g., -0- sales to the IBM installed base of ThinkPad notedbooks & ThinkCentre desktops) is foreboding for any chance of setting new highs (IMO).
receiving a licensing royalty (which will be marginalized in heavy volumes IMO) is certainly a possible path towards survival, but in no way implies the world dominion some HOPE for, but considering that NSM & Wave first publicly mentioned the SafeKeeper initiative in Nov 2002 (& it has yet to materialize in any measurable Wave revs), i'm about as as skseptical as one can be.
good luck.
lugan, you might want to include in the otherwise (more or less) balanced timeline you've created, references to the 3 derivative claims filed against the Wave BofD as these claims are entirely different from the class action suits.
Sachs v. Sprague, et al. (04-30037-MAP Filed 02/23/04);
Swanson v. Sprague, et al. (04-30038-KPN);
Harvey v. Sprague, et al. (04-30044-MAP Filed 02/24/04)
fwiw, a motion to consolidate the 3 claims was filed thursday by the Plaintiffs. Wave principals have not yet answered the complaint & presumably only have a few days remaining to do so...
impressively prescient Snackman
you sure called that one -- how'd ya know there would be *that* kinda volume? when you posted "Watch the volume" (@ 3:06 p.m.) there really wasn't any to speak of & wavx was still at $1.25.
then, all of a sudden... BLAMMO!!!
amazing.
btw, no way was it short covering -- something leaked out & maybe it was actually some news which might eventually lead to revs. JMO of course.
http://139.142.147.22/GifChartEngine.dll?interval_day=6&cus=&indexSymbol=&securityType=1...
http://data.island.com/ds/tools/timeandsales/timeandsales.jsp?rows=100&width=555&links=true&...
http://host.businessweek.com/businessweek/Historical_Quotes.html?Symbol=WAVX&StartDate=03%2F17%2...
guv / hello -- the post directed to D&O last night provided a decent roadmap for today's spike & woulda been mostly filled @ an avg of $1.50. i doubt you'd be surprised to read that i doubt the spike will last w/out something significant released in the a.m.
though i must admittedly eat a little crow on the MSFT road show thingy, but bear in mind that those "sponsorships" usually involve paying a fee & very little (if anything) more. nevertheless, Wave has a forum for additional HYPE next month & it could juice wavx back above the warrant strike per Zeev's plan.
but at the same time, like Snack always says, little has changed 'cept the short term price... the fundamentals of Wave remain completely attrocious & the audited 10K is one day closer.
good luck.
greetings guv'na...
how 'bout this?
CNBC reported today that Marsh & McLennan (MMC: NYSE) is appointing an ordinary shareholder to its BofD.
Wasn't it reported by someone from the SanFran lunch bunch that SKS said such a move wasn't possible due to the adverse impact it'd have w/Wave's (meager) institutional holders?
take a look @ MMC's Inst. Holders:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/ownership/ownership.asp?Symbol=MMC
some familiar names there who apparently don't object to MMC doing precisely what SKS reportedly said wasn't possible -- 'cept MMC is worth around $25Billion.
as for the IBM website listing - that's great, but it took around 8 months from the PR just to get it on the site. great partnership Wave has there w/IBM.
how many units have been sold to the IBM installed base?
based on the CCs from Q3 & Q4, it looks like around zero.
i thought the world was clammoring for Wave's tech?
D&O - IMO you'll get another chance.
i discount Zeev's $1.90 theorem b/c of the specter of the SEC & around 100 plaintiffs' attorneys (versus how many for Wave? 2? maybe 4?), but i do think there might be some other HYPE in the months ahead that'll temporarily take it back up above 1.50 (though it might only last for 15 minutes or so).
maybe a staggered set of GTC sells from 1.40 - 1.70 would be prudent?
but after all, you have said you only used "gambling money" to buy wavx unlike others who i suspect have 80-100% of their investment capital in it & many of those, i further suspect, are on the cusp of retirement...
dumped *during* the CC
while breakeven-Steven was yammering i liberated my funds from voidism - it was the frosting on the cake after dumping in the high 4s & a bunch of good trades b/tw 4 & 2.50.
but i did come back one last time for a full swing < 1.60 on day of BofD buy & dumped it again above 2 (which was the cherry on top).
it wasn't about being any smarter than anyone else here, it was all about the sobriety & i get my 4 year chip as a recovering wavaholic in a few months!
the sobriety brings w/it the objectivity that 24 likes to post about & makes one immune to the HYPE.
wonder how many former voids will sign up for the class action before the April deadline? wonder if that number will increase as wavx slips below a buck in the days/weeks ahead?
imagine how many non-productive thousands of hours have been forever lost by all the wavoids over the last decade dreaming of their imminent wealth & world domination...
$1.30 ain't a bargain D&O... it's a short-bus stop on the way to de-listing IMO.
24, given Wave's total lack of P & lotsa "L"
i'll simply say,
goodnight _oser
SO, did 24 sell out his wavx position?
which, if you did, it'd be completely understandable given the absolute collapse of the stock recently... too bad you weren't selling when Peter & Steven & Gerry were dumping.
Happy St. Paddy's...
could you be more wrong?
yer up to yer gills in wavx, which has been cut in HALF in the last 30 days or so from the wavoid IDF/RSA HYPE & yer calling me angry?!?
too keefing funny dude!
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=WAVX,uu[w,a]daclyiay[dc][pb15!d15,2!f][vc60][iut!Lh15,3!....
stochastics = 16 & 20
world domination is just around the corner!!!!
LMAO@U
dahling, nobody has to read SPIN...
just like nobody has to believe a word from WaveWorld -- they choose[/i/ to, or not.
btw, thoroughly enjoyed yer yarn regarding the restatement of results though.
wonder if Bill Lerach cracked a smile?
yer right 24, wavoids are the objective ones!
it's a year later & there's zero visibility about any of the .50/unit revs you want people to stipulate to & you have the temerity to prattle on about objectivity?
why did Wave's revs decline Q-to-Q?
& why didn't SKS make any comments in the CC about Q1 (which was almost over when the CC took place?)
c'mon, be objective...