Replies to post #238073 on Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[aleajactaest]

Wasn't BP Wave's third major project?

And wasn't it followed by precisely zero major orders?

One can get too close to managers and "vision" and lose perspective on the failure of a company to produce a steady stream of revenue in a commercially viable timescale.

Wave designed many pieces of software. Not much revenue from any of them. That's the knowledge an investor needs to have to form an opinion of a company's performance over a long period.

[dig space]

*The preponderance of this is outside of the main point of my post, the main point is that DMI (IMO) offers more than just professional services for meeting projects at scale.

But on BP, I don't recall that BP success opening any floodgates of orders. A lack of orders is what happened, that is the BP deal was the deal to END all deals, which to me requires explaining, and none of the points you made address how it went from GM to BASF to BP to zero.

They 'don't get it' fails as an explanation for what was being successful becoming entirely unsuccessful. The collapse of success was a real thing, not a "sounding smart" thing or a "blaming" thing, it was a real measurable thing lacking explanation (short of a flood and a 'get it' notion). Given that there had been significant succses in three different verticals, and then there was no subsequent success, the logical place to look for blame is at Wave, not the customer.

And FWIW my language did include "perhaps" and "wouldn't be surprised", so I am ethically satisfied with the speculative nature of my content.

While I am confident you have much more background and information than I, we are also both aware of the fact that you have at times been fed patently false information. See e.g. the "fact" that the ATM was not in use at a specific time where the subsequent SEC filing declared unambiguously that it in fact was. Claims of firm simple facts, when clearly wrong, temper the reliability of sources (to me).

[dig space]

and awk, the points you made are entirely consistent with my speculation,

... that the BP deployment was laden with "discoveries", "a beast", and "needs to be tamed" to the extent that it deterred subsequent sales.

And that, to me, from a business perspective, is bungling not juggling.

That some BP tech individuals switched to Wave 'cause the stuff looks cool does little to address the fact that no other companies chose to follow the BP corporate decision. That requires an explanation, I offered one.