News Focus
News Focus
icon url

TonyMcFadden

09/28/03 10:41 PM

#11868 RE: awk #11867

Since we're tossing around numbers that have no merit (there is no history of acceptance of this kind of paradigm shift)


1. Near term (2003/2004)

In the very near term Wave's "significant" income will come from Premium Services as the number of TPM's is relatively low. Maybe 20 million units in 2004 (Licenses $10 million, Premium Services at 10% adoption rate $40 - 60 million)

I prefer to look at the low end licensing number, as it may be more likely with volume orders. Also, volume licenses for Premium services will be at a discount to the retail price. In addition, initial adoption rate of premium services will be low)


2. Medium term (2005)

I estimate 40-50 million units during this time span. So licensing revenue will be around $20-$25 million and Premium Services should, still assuming 25% adoption, generate about $200 - $250 million

Same volume arguments as near term.

I can't see the point in looking beyond 2005 at this point. Information gleaned from the coming 6 quarters will make forecasts that much easier to make.

That said, even with conservative numbers, Wave has the potential to rake in barrow loads of cash....

And none of this includes TAN based revenues, XPresso revenues, FINREAD activities or Government contracts...

icon url

barge

09/28/03 10:56 PM

#11871 RE: awk #11867

awk--Without me prodding you, you'd never come up with such a terrific post! lol! The only aspect of your post that I take issue with is this line:

"Steven Sprague anticipates programmable platforms for secure application execution by approx. 2006"

The specs for TCG 1.2 will be available by the end of this year. I think the push for programmable Embassy Chips will begin there. Otherwise, you're going to have the situation where a business purchases a Trusted ThinkPad PC which is LOCKED into, for example, IBM WebSphere Trusted Applications, but LOCKED OUT from ALL other Trusted Applications outside of the IBM WebSphere Trust Domain. That type of CLOSED SYSTEM is untenable, especially if an OPEN INTEROPERABLE SYSTEM is AVAILABLE.