Skimoor: Does it strike you as odd, shareholders need to send these articles out? Does it not follow if Wave had a product that satisfied need at a reasonable price, wouldn't it sell itself?
It is not as if Wave is an unknown. Articles in Barrons, Smart Money and the New York Times, as well as a play about the company have spread the brand. Granted, most of those had a mocking tone--but deserved, IMO.
There is some given at the very heart of the Wave dilemma that is not a given at all. We follow the given assumptions it works and works well. That is what we have been told and told.
Yet, that is not what the record shows, or what Wave's declining revenues indicate.
In many supporter circles, re-examination of any of the pillars on which Wave hopes rest--is not allowed. Yet, increasingly as the years pass with more rich promises and more disappointing results, a re-examination is called for, allowed or not, IMO.
Look at all the pilot studies, brief traction with GM and others--which, for some reason, do not re-engage. Those companies try it and walk away.
Shouldn't that be a warning something is not right, that we are proceeding along a wrong path?
I'm not talking about mgt issues--put those aside for a moment and ask yourself, if you were the decider at a large corporation and you knew the minimum costs of a breach or data leak--is in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Does it make any sense whatsoever, that exactly what you need to protect your company, your job and your customers, is exactly what you will not buy?
That is the convincing logic yet to be refuted.
Granted, that is not all of the problem. Competence is an issue, financial stability and durability is an issue and so is nepotism.
But even with those heavy anchors dragging Wave down, if the Wave product solved most security problems by using a device already inside computers--why wouldn't it be adopted and fast? If the product was good, buyers would not care so much about the internal issues of the seller.
Is there a reasonable explanation, other than the conclusion, maybe Wave's solution is not all that great?
If the product can stand on its own, why then so much deception, lying, posing and pretending? If it works as well as the supporters claim, why isn't it selling?
Perhaps re-examination is called for, rather than seeing if what has failed before, will continue to fail.
Best wishes--Blue
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
