kant,
that is a snackman type response (and before you delete it snack note that it is a point you have made many times).
Kant, please do the world and yourself a favor and recognize that this is a percentage game.
If I short a stock at a buck and it goes to 90 cents I made 10 percent.
The same effort with a similar investment with IBM requires it to drop by 10 bucks for me to realise what I get from Wave.
There are billions of pin-headed perceptions (none of which the board leaders here have not championed)
1. dilution is good, it diminishes share loses
2. options and dilution don't matter, splits make it go away
3. spending half of your last PP financing on the salaries of the founding family is good, the opportunity cost of that capital means nothing.
So (contrary to such idiocy), get this, shorting 1 buck stocks is perhaps the most profitable thing to do as they are most likely to go to sub penny. I could list thousands ... but the point is, shorting at 1.20 and covering at 0.002 happens ALL THE TIME. So you take out your calculator and tell me gains, how and why there is better opportunities. (e.g. short Wave at 1.20 expecting bkt at .002 is 600% AND IT COULD hapend in a heartbeat //SEC//Lawsuits//) Compare to IBM, IBM would have to drop to 15 bucks.
So, what do you think is more likely that Wave goes BKT or IBM drops to 15 bucks (from its circa 100/share range). Huh?
O.K. lets drop to a 30% gain. wave to 90 cents or IBM to 70 bucks ... again ... what do you really think is a better bet? huh, who is really taking the risk, huh?
Why is math so hard?
again, you are a shorter and you want 30% ... do you look to Wve to go to 90 cents ot IBM to fall to 70 bucks. Seriously.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
