Barge: The great majority of Steven's lies were not misinterpretations of his statements, i.e., "I can hit break-even by Q1 (2007) based on orders in hand."[SKS---2006].
There was plenty of misinterpretation, too--but all based on Steven's fabrications about huge deals that only needed lawyering or signatures, tens of thousand of seats, why he was not "allowed" to buy on the open market, because of all the big deals in the pipeline.
That last one was so transparent and so obviously untrue, it's hard to understand how anyone believed it--but they did.
Once a CEO lies to the shareholders, public and media the way Steven did so profusely, it makes every statement thereafter subject to suspicion of untruth. The CEO does not always have to tell the whole truth, but outright lying again and again is not acceptable in American business and is part of the reason Wave's share price is once again flirting with the de-listing minimum of $1.
Steven made Wave a laughingstock company on two fronts: his arrogant mendacity, coupled with his failure to ever produce the results he claimed were coming in the following quarter or two. These lies were repeated in one form or another over the entire time he was CEO.
Don't forget Feeney lied about break-even too in almost the exact words Steven did.
There were many who said his untruths didn't matter and many who said it was acceptable for him to lie to keep the company going.
Steven's Fibber McGee impersonation cost shareholders tens of millions in losses, because they simply couldn't believe the CEO of a publicly traded company would be able to outright lie his head off with impunity.
The shareholders who excused it or rationalized it were part of the institutionalizing of his constant whoppers. They argued against penalizing the CEO for misleading them--and we all see how that ended up.
The lies got bigger and bigger as time passed with no execution and more inept missteps, with the rabid crowd outright excusing it, ["will any of that matter when Wave hits $100 a share?"]
Likewise the supporters excused the loading of the payroll with relatives, the many rounds of dilution, the failure of a single one of SKS's predictions to come true--any one of which would result in immediate firing at most companies.
We now have a new CEO who has done his best as quick as he could, to chop the gaggle of blood-suckers from the payroll, to close down unproductive subsidiaries having no connection with Wave's core business and to attempt to bring Wave back from the dead.
Maybe he can do it or maybe the pit was simply too deep for Solms to crawl out of with Wave on his back.
Our reality, because of what you think is Steven's "great vision," is a bleak future with more dilution in it--products so crappy they are hard or impossible to sell and I would guess another reverse split not far down the road.
26 years without a single penny of profit is a long time to hold on, without any reinforcing validation--while at the same time, those same rabid supporters were claiming the gusher would flow at any minute.
Steven brought devastation to shareholders, 'vision' notwithstanding. His legacy is abject and complete failure and losses on top of losses. That's the reality.
I believe you have a good heart and are trying to find some way to soften the blows--but the truth is Steven was a miserable manager, arrogant and headstrong, as well as a person who simply could not tell the truth if his life depended on it.
As a result, Wave hangs by the slenderest of threads, dangling above the precipice with no salvation in immediate sight. If Wave does succeed, it will be despite Steven, not because of him.
Why not let the chips fall where they should fall--squarely on Steven's shoulders? Why search far and wide for faux causes of Wave's many failures elsewhere, when it is clear to most of us, exactly who is responsible for Wave's current dire predicament?
Best, Blue
