Replies to post #216274 on Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[dig space]

my aren't we having fun, we've got us some cowards, thought police, trenches, secret phone calls, caller ID spoofing and so on.

I made no claim that anything wasn't a guess (thought police relish double negatives). I asked, under the largely stated assumption that somewhere around here there might be somebody willing to take a guess at component percentage.

Somewhere somebody did muse that 50% sounds as plausible as not.

Cool. There are many things I would hazard a component percentage guess at. This is not one of them. I am clueless, and do what I do when clueless and asked.

The point that it may be easier to take a believed charge per seat and apply that to the number of seats is great, but rarely in all of this "DD" has one been shown the bill.

When I get a bill and am digging for a tip, I don't immediately review how any diners there were. I just move the decimal point and double it. Boom, 20% is done.

My approach to numerical dilemma is predicated by the information provided. One could assemble the various assumptions about 100% penetrance (or its lack) notions of discounts from 150k seats to the variably guesstimated 1m to some what was 7 or 14 or 97 million seats? (or discount lack), and assert that such an approach is inherently better all while presumably reshuffling things to fit under the known bill.

I consider a known bill to add value, as indeed these other approaches can and have been done here many many many times, and for me doing them again was playing an old tape.

Then new data appeared. The bill. 2bn.

To me, the instant response was "what's the cut", it seems yet another reiteration of the very tired seat guess times price per seat with a known bill is more designed to answer the question "how many seats is mil planning". If every penny goes to Wave, it sounds like we are talking 10 million to 30 million seats. If wave gets half, its a different number.

I am going to take the last several post to mean something akin to "no".

i.e. No, Dig Space, I have no idea what cut of a "PKI initiative" ERAS and cousins would get.

Fair enough, ya'll is in good company :)