blue, it seems you are ignoring alea's stated interest and methodology.
Wave reported 6.7m ... agreed. Alea has stated that when backing out larger orders, bundling, etc, that Q4>Q1>Q2 has shown growth and that that SLICe is what (s)he is looking at as an indicator of increased demand .... 'breadth'.
Had wave just reported 7.7m instead of 6.7m, but at the beginning of the Q they had landed a $10m GM like contract (recorded over a year) then 2.5m of the 7.7 would have been large orders, and the growth alea refers to would have evaporated. I lamented this evaporation some time ago amid a period of high-fives over large orders as I feared large orders were too much like asteroids, and while not couching it as eloquently in terms of breadth of demand, definitely wanted to see robust, stable QtoQ small order growth. I believe the consequences of that growth observably evaporating some time ago has now well played out, over the long term it has been devastating in terms of dilution, stability, and market penetration. Everybody told me to chill (alea too as memory serves) and that enterprise orders was what was going to grow this company. we've seen how that played out.
The point is this:
Most would say that 7.7 vs 6.7 would have been better for Q2. Alea's method (while (s)he would likely welcome a $10m order) would score breadth of demand WORSE had 7.7 been booked as a consequence of a $10m order as when backed out it would show contraction of breadth of demand .... something I recall observing a long time ago with considerable concern.
What is material in this method is whether the sample is adequate for robust conclusions. Certainly the QtoQ growth of this small segment of Wave revs has been robust over the frame to which alea refers (better than 40% per Q) so what remains to be sen is whether Qs 3 and 4 can show a continuation in that slice. What metric a person chooses to value in a company that is losing money but hoping stop doing so is their choice. While looking at gross numbers has been fun at times, the punctate nature of the occasional large order and the focus of the company away from less immediately fruitful SMBs has been taken its toll. tck may refer to this as just bad management, failure to hold SMB sales to account, failing to drive SMB sales, and hiding behind supply excuses for large orders. If the modest shakeup in sales teams, cutting staff, hiring a new VP and so on is starting to precipitate growth in this neglected slice of Wave sales (recovery of breadth of SMB sales) then it is noteworthy. alea's method indicates it may be occurring. that would not be insignificant.
The above content is my opinion.
AI
