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.
Unfortunately, openended statements and fundamental credibility are not reassuring.
Micro....
Excellent post! And far more importantly, hope everything turns out well with your surgery/biopsy.
Wishing you my best!
Joe
oknpv...As Bingoman infered, how do you find new qualified and independent replacements even if the croonies did resign? Which kind of brings it back to what I posted before; awhile back I was informed by a couple of high level executives from public companies that only institutional investors can impact an efficient and effective change on a BOD.
Who knows, perhaps with all the investor unrest some good will come of it.
Best Wishes!
CPA...Even though the BOD is more a BOC (board of croonies) than anything else, I believe the sentiments of most investors here are similar to that of oknpv and would like to see a change but fear what the ramifications would be at this very tenuous and tentative time. To be honest, my feelings are conflicted about the timing as well.
CPA...I'm all for change too. How many shares do you believe would be needed? And not to touch any sore spots, but lets face it, relationships between people on this board are pretty sensitive. In other words, (IMO), investors interested in your idea would probably only feel comfortable with a benign personality type leading the way. As you know, Magdelina tried and received very little support.
Try emailing SKS from another email address. I had no problems emailing him and received replies.
oknpv...
The other day I posted to you links of previous posts by Magdelina and CM that profiles the trouble with the BOD. Those posts were quickly deleted then, but were vindicated today.
If you're interested in reading them, click on my thread.
Either way, just a very small thing.e/
Does this qualify as double standards?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=3767396
OKNPV: Another from CM:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2594269
OKNPV...I defer you to this post:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2008302
Well, did my part again. (eom)
John, you could be right. But I have discussed this with a couple of top level executives in fairly large public companies and that's basically what I was informed.
Perhaps we need a leader like Jas or CM to speak for all concerned investors. Magdelina gave it a try months ago but didn't appear to recieve much support.
Jas, investor dismay with the BOD and management is apparently expanding and intensifying. A long time coming if you ask me. The question is, what if anything can a group of concerned individual investors do to impact a change? I hope I'm wrong but my understanding is, basically nothing; only institutional investors can pressure BOD changes.
We can at least encourage all like minded investors to email or mail management and/or the BOD and convey their disappointment and concerns and request resignations. I for one have done so on several occassions already.
Like anything else, there's strength in numbers.
IMO, PC/OEM's opted to wait for v1.2. e/
nelz + eamon, LOL! Thanks for the laugh! e/
Listen to it twice. Doesn't sound as bad the second time.
The link is on Wave's website. e/
oknpv...you heard correctly. e/
And do the resellers find the customers or do the customers find the resellers?
How many shares of SFLK does Wave hold? e/
Thanks Tex. Like you, have a feeling a buyout is likely, and hopefully..."north of 10". And once we're clear of the SEC we should see some positive momentum.
Best wishes to you and ALL Wave longs!
Maybe not a buyout but a new BOD and certain managment changes sure would be nice.
Personally, I sure as hell would not like to see significant revenues in the hands of those who've been minding the store for the past 6 or 7 years. If they can short-sightedly and shoddily manage $122 milllion and justify awarding themselves bonuses and raises for dubious reasons in the face of being cash starved, you have to seriously question how competent they would be at managing substantial recurring revenue and corporate growth.
...And you can never exclude the possibility of a buyout at anytime.
...or some short covering. e/
Thanks Weby! Your analogy of standing in the garden or graveyard is a good one. Wave is so damn ambiguous I can empathize with any honest person who feels optimistic, pessimistic, or both.
CC next week? When? Must have missed the PR. e/
Zen, You're absolutely right. : - (
Repost of SKS comments on revenues:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1804651
Tampa....This is a market in it's infancy. Who knows what the baby is going to grow up to be? Could be SIDS or a huge success for all we know.
Anyway, the estimations I heard a number of times were in the ballpark of $25 per seat, in addition to revenues from licensing fees, Wavexpress, etc. It's a gamble for sure. However, in gambling when the odds are against you the payoff is usually well worth it if you hit. So, you either stay, raise, or fold, based upon you're feeling for your hand in the game.
Basically, I look at it this way...anyone who has products that are widely needed and/or wanted, and nobody else has those products, chances are you'll be successful.
And that's the enviable posistion I believe Wave is in.
Excellent post Wildman! e/
allman, tampa, FWIW....
I inquired about TAN sometime ago and asked how it would apply to (non-Embassy chips) TPM's and attestation. Basically, I was informed that TAN managages only programmable devices and trusted applications, such as trustlets, and attestation servers are not associated with any TAN functions.
Have to assume the TAN in on the shelf for awhile...
Microsoft To Embed Security Deeper In Windows Systems
June 24, 2004
The vendor is touting its efforts to be more proactive and talking up the security benefits of Windows Server 2003.
By Charles Babcock
Microsoft customers tell Rick Devenuti, corporate VP of IT: "Microsoft tells us lots of things but you don't tell us what's really important." They also tell him: "Microsoft's comments are very descriptive. Be more prescriptive" on how to set up new software or make a system more secure.
Devenuti recounted those two comments as among those he's encountered most frequently as he talks to customers about how to improve security.
As part of its effort to be more prescriptive, Microsoft has staged a series of "summits" around the country seeking to advise customers on how to implement greater security in the Microsoft portion of the enterprise infrastructure. Devenuti made the last stop of the tour on Tuesday in San Francisco, where he advised several hundred customers at the Moscone Center they would gain a stronger perimeter if they standardize on Windows 2003 Server for their Web servers, mail servers, and other gateways into the company. During its first 12 months, Windows Server 2003 had only 13 Security Bulletins issued on problems with the operating system, compared with 43 in the first 12 months of Windows 2000, he said.
Earlier this month, Devenuti noted, Microsoft upgraded its Windows XP client operating system by issuing Service Pack 2 with an improved Windows Firewall, which has previously been shut off by default. Such was the case even inside Microsoft, and Devenuti said he and other employees questioned why the firewall was shut off as the Blaster worm spread through companies in 2003. If the firewall had been easier to activate, Blaster would have encountered more barriers to its spread.
Service Pack 2 for Windows XP includes a Security Center that quickly tells the user whether the firewall is off or on and gives the user the means to turn on desired features. It also provides an attachment manager that protects against potentially malicious E-mail and includes a blocker of pop-ups and other downloaded code into Internet Explorer.
Overall, the service pack is reducing the number of things turned on in Windows XP unless the user decides they need to be turned on. The adjustment means the operating system now ships "following the idea of least privilege. The surface for attack has been made as small as possible," because viruses, worms, and other exploits often find a way into a system through little-used but open features, Devenuti said.
In the meantime, Microsoft is working on additional security features for Windows, but customers will have to wait until 2007 for the Longhorn version of Windows to appear. One is to include "behavior blocking," or a self-monitoring feature in Windows that can tell when the machine is being put to use outside a range of normal patterns.
"We know using Notepad to send E-mail to everybody in the address book is not normal. Block it. The machine will remain infected but it won't have a chance to infect everyone else's," noted Devenuti.
Microsoft is in the process of simplifying its method for updating its software. "Right now, we have eight different flavors of updates. We're moving to only two, one for operating systems and one for applications," he said.
Microsoft will also seek to reduce the size of updates and build in a rollback capability so that customers may install them more quickly, and return to an earlier version if something goes awry. Many IT organizations hesitate to install security patches or updates without extensive testing against existing systems to make sure the additions won't disrupt their operations, Devenuti said, adding that, "Customers have told me 'the medicine has got to be less painful than the disease.'"
Bingoman...Perhaps you should direct your # 2 rule re: "Ad Nasuseum" to this board's more prolific contributors of that. I'm sure you could think of a handful or so that would not include me.
As far as your rule #1, that's my rule # 1 too.
Peace!
To the person who PM'd me...Thank you for the message and forward. Sorry, I'm unable to (pm) respond....in kind.
You can trust the forward will go no further.
Barge, don't waste your time. I have no respect for bullies, and don't answer to them. If you haven't noticed, one way or another they all seem to end up losers.
You're free to believe, interpret, or think anything you want about anything you like. Makes no difference to me.
RE: SKS. He clearly knows, understands, and articulates the technology and landscape as good and perhaps better than anyone. However, IMO, as CEO his leadership/management/administrative qualities have been highly questionable at times.
Seriously, I believe he would make an excellent Executive VP and board member with competent (non-croonie) directors at the same table. Never have felt comfortable knowing he has the authority to make all the bottom line decisions with rubber stamp approval by the BOD.
Orda...
No, I didn't. I frankly asked if Wave's WaveMeter technolgy is playing any part in MSFT's Janus project. And that was the answer. If we indeed were involved, I'm confident I would have recieved a no comment type response or no reply at all. Don't see how anyone would think otherwise.
But who knows....it makes perfect sense that metering may well become HOT business that other gorillas want in on. And perhaps some of those gorillas may well conclude the easiest, quickest, most economical, straightforward route to compete with MSFT/Janus is to partner with or license Wave's metering technology.
rachelelise, what more needs to be said....?
"no our metering technology is not part of janus."
That's the complete and total email response I received several weeks ago. Pretty straightforward one line answer, don't you agree?
CM, thank you! Was anticipating your review of the SHM, and appreciate your overall frankness, especially with respect to the BOD. As you know you are not alone, although not popular in this assessment.
Would appreciate if you could elaborate more about Dell. Dont quite know how to translate that paragraph. Hope I'm wrong, but on the surface sounds to me like a blown opportunity. Also, did you hear or were you involve with any discussion regarding metering? Seems to me a recent hot topic, not mentioned thus far.