Alea: I think what you said is true. Does it matter how sterling Wave's technology is, if buyers shun it?
Many have touted the advantage of Wave's 'superior' technology, but Wave has failed repeatedly the only real test--in the marketplace.
No doubt Solms & Co. are working 24/7 to fix that, but given a late start, insufficient finances and a horrible company reputation--I wonder if he and his new team can pull off a worst to first finish--or even drag Wave to profitability anytime soon--let alone in the time frame the new CEO has set for himself. Thus far, it does not look promising, IMO.
In fact, I'd bet against it, precisely because of the big obstacles lined up against Wave.
The biggest obstacle may be the lynch-pin of Wave's basic strategy--using the TPM to harden defenses against the wholesale attacks going on now. TPM usage may be going up, may be static or even declining. It's hard to say, because the usage is not yet at a measurable level. Of all the obstacles Wave is facing, this may be the biggest.
The best technology does not always win, although the worst technology almost never wins. Where does Wave sit on that spectrum? A: We don't know. We do know Wave, despite efforts, has never been able to sell its product in a sustainable way.
These are the reasons I am so pessimistic about Wave's chances at a future better than the past 26 years. The short run looks horrible, the longer run not much better and complicating the long run's issues, is the lack of financial stability at Wave.
All of the wild squandering of resources under the past CEO has endangered Wave's future, IMO, to the point it will take a long-shot miracle to reverse things and an even longer-shot miracle to bring those long and faithful shareholders back to profitability.
Blue
