Replies to post #142303 on Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[Bucket Master]

Actually what I'm hearing is various viewpoints, intelligent conversation and legitimate questions being raised in a quest for understanding around a proposal that can affect our investment. Not sure I see any ranting, resentment, etc. Of course JMO

[mymoneybgone]

Scorpio

from the proxy:
"If and to the extent that options granted under the Directors Plan expire or terminate without having been exercised, new options may be granted thereunder with respect to the shares covered by such expired or terminated option, provided that the grant and the terms of such new options shall in all
respects comply with the provisions of the Directors Plan."

Unless I misunderstand here, it's seems they can just replace the number of expired option with new option without shareholder approaval as long as it it same in as out.

With this language already active they could lure new talent by reissuing shares to cover those expired if that number was adequate. If we are to believe that Seagate rev will be amassing and shouldn't Dell start ramping up as well?- Wave should then have more than enough rev coming in later this year to bring in new talent. This scenario also allows the shareholders to see traction and puts this whole scenario to rest.

Dave

[zen 88]

scorpio- I think it's about entitlement.

It's a feeling. The feeling you get from management. You want a point by point list of possibilites of what 'might befall your investment'? Don't know that that is the issue. Most of us that are voting no, still think the company will succeed.

As wavxmaster stated so well, in financing they are thinking Q to Q, but in options, they are thinking 7 years ahead? It all exudes an aura of entitlement and short-sightedness. Yet these are the folks who you trust will never sell you out or take this private? That's a lot of trust built on a history of Machievellian behavior. Our greed is the leverage for their means, unfortunately, and I can only HOPE we will be rewarded in the end. Maybe vision trumps greed? Again, I hope.

[rachelelise]

Scorpio

We've said it dozens of times. The proposal authorizes way too many options and raises the annual limits too high and based on the written compesnation policy doesn't indicate how they will be dipersed. All this against a backdrop of lots of dilution over the years and a philosophy that says the incentive compensation is not set against any performance targets.

So I see the likelihood of too many options being dispersed reducing the value of my ownership.

And that doesn't get into the timing, the absurd explanations that have beem made by management and in my opinion the counter arguements being raised. I do not believe wave's success will be harmed by saying no and establishing lower limits and a critieria for option (and comp) distribution but I do expect to have my ownership diluted more than it should by management. This is not a scam - just their core beliefs.

Clear enough.