Root: I do not blame the Solms team for what went on before he got there. I have criticized him for setting goals with timelines, standing by them when it was clear they were not going to materialize--as a little too similar to what the past administration did. I have wondered why he would have even gotten himself into that position, knowing the history.
I appreciate and have noted the positives of the Solms regime--the pruning of diseased deadwood, the shuttering of family adventures that sucked out resources without the potential to contribute revenue and his firing of the old sales team and replacing them with eager beavers.
You seem to think the "transition" from SMB to large enterprise is simply a matter of time. I think the lack of sales is something far deeper and darker--reflective of a problem with the product itself--as evidenced by the many companies who have tried and rejected Wave, or simply shunned them in the first place.
If my tirades are tiresome, please skip them. I could say the same thing about your dot collecting the endless discussions about standards, etc. But as for results, I have yet to see one sign of progress under the Solms administration--other than words.
Yes, if Wave's VSC 2 sells to large customers, it will be answered prayers. So far, they have not sold and I think the arguments about sales cycles, various standards, Wave's funding and financial stability are more excuses for the lack of sales, when the real problem is the product itself, IMO.
There probably is some truth in all of those arguments, but in the aggregate, they do not hold water, IMO. The market for security could not be better than it is and is getting better every day. Yet, Wave seems trapped in some bad trough it can not get out of.
I think you are a sincere person with a good heart. However, for those of us who have been hearing variations on the "imminent Wave success" for way more than a decade--that too, is truly tiresome.
Perhaps we should chat again when there are positive signs, or yet another quarter ending with no news. I think the latter is probably more likely.
Altogether, I wish you well and hope your hope in Wave is not misplaced as has been the case for me for 19 years. If Wave ever turns the corner, I will have a totally different perspective and would probably be among the first to re-invest.
You might find Tony McFadden's story has resonance with you. Tony lives on the other side of the world and constructed a web Wave Matrix he maintained at great expense of time. He was an active poster and he believed all the BS about great things coming for shareholders.
When he moved to another country, he was required to sell all his holdings and he stated flatly, he was fed up with the endless slog, the lies about profitability and that he would not buy back in until Wave began to sell in a sustainable manner. That was about 5 years ago--is my memory. Thus far, he has not gotten back in.
Such persistent resistance to Wave in the face of the current environment of insecurity must be examined for the underlying truths behind it. Many excuses have been made, but Wave continues to fail to either sell to new companies, despite a remarkable collection of tech 'partners,' or to hang on to the ones they had (Dell).
I do not merge the past and present regimes in my mind. They are separate and should be judged separately. However, the record thus far for the new regime is not impressive--but it is a little early to call the game.
With the share price dipping into the 70 cent range, the immediate future does not appear to hold much chance for change--if you go along with the thought the market prices in everything at least six months out. The market, of course, could be wrong--but over a long period of time, it has reflected more or less--Wave's actual position.
With Wave, many of us have learned from experience to deal with what is, not what is allegedly coming down the pike in a short while. The hope for what might be, has never been supported by results.
Happy New Year--Blue
