Replies to post #239939 on Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[dig space]

Blue, FWIW, the "smart money" folks are not really paid to recommend Wave-like equities at this point.

Remove dilution from the horizon, show some rising sales, both of which would still leave Wave weellllll below the limelight, and then one paid to provide advice regarding other peoples money might consider mentioning it.

There is speculative investing, and then there are "distressed" companies (Etrade e.g. lists WAVX as "distressed").

Distressed companies are lottery tickets, and there is pleeeennnty of time between patching the holes in the hull and any sort of rockety thingy.
Those that invest in distressed equities basically can count on 2-3x or more than those who restrict it to the highly speculative but not abjectly distressed.

For example, were Wave to record a significant deal this year (>$350k) with some follow on activity in Q1 of say $2m above normal billings and then achieve cfbe in Q2 on the backs of some $3.5m in billings above norms the equity would likely reach multiples of 4-5x sales (that would be SP around $2-3). That is where the paid folks start to follow things and consider recommendations (or where smart folks participate), particularly if the treasury is in good shape - that is the events listed above happen after another round of equity financing.

What smart money does is participate after dilution.

Basically what I am doing is rejecting your entire argument. Smart money employs hierarchical thinking, participating in front of pending dilution or even a reasonable chance of it is generally only done smartly as a participant in said dilution. More clearly: smart money invests in distressed companies through private placements, not in open markets ... and for that Wave has been able to generate adequate demand.

Those that advise, were they to follow all these standards, and if they thought Wave was the next big thing would still advise clients about the opportunity to participate in a future placement, their long term investment being in the form of warrants ...

Yours is basically a colorful piece of rhetoric far removed from reality, based on false assumptions, and steeped in pseudo-logic all packaged up as a compelling bit of spin.

That isn't to say that the ideas of those who expect some constellation of standards to precipitate sudden significant demand for products from anybody where there is not already demand are not also spinning gossamer hubris adorned with worthless shiny highlights.