Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[dig space]

mmbg, sensible post.

The RS must be of a magnitude to actually succeed in holding the SP for compliance. The PS must clear the 1s I would think, so 1:5 or 1:10 seems the way to go. I don't know why nobody seems to think 1:10 is on the table, it, IMO, is.

It is not my understanding that the shareholders necessarily have a voice in splits.

http://www.sec.gov/answers/reversesplit.htm

"A company’s board of directors may declare a reverse stock split without shareholder approval. "

however, in jurisdictions requiring or encouraged to use a nominal par value (e.g. Delaware) my limited understanding is reestablishemnt of a par value would mean amendment of the articles and hence a shareholder vote.

It is a matter of some confusion, but it seems that interpretation of Delaware law (where I believe Wave is incorporated) is that the "may" in law is as a practical matter interpreted as "must"

http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/corpsec/blogs/corporate-law-blog/archive/2011/04/06/one-for-the-lawyers-forward-split-in-delaware-requires-shareholder-approval.aspx

But in any event, I am thinking 1:5 or 1:10, with the proxy seeking authorization for 1:3, 1:5 and 1:10 with 3 and 5 almost undoubtedly getting approved and likely 10 as well.

If one assume this to play out at 50 cents and go off at 1:5, with a post-split of 2.50 and a likely restatement of share authorization at 150m, wave will stand with something like 25m shares outstanding and room to print another 125.