Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : WAVX Anyone? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (7860)	7/5/1999 6:47:00 PM
From: Golden Bear	Respond to of 11417

More from the same filing... Also, the holder of these patents or its licensees could seek to invalidate the claims of the patent which we have licensed and therefore be able to commercialize a technology similar to our technology. We can give no assurance that we would be successful in invalidating such claims or, in turn, avoid having our claims invalidated. Any proceeding involving the validity of these patents would be protracted and costly. If these other four patents are not invalid insofar as their claims relate to our technology, then we would require a license from the holder of these patents to commercialize our technology. Due to the uncertainty as to whether these other patents could be proved to be invalid, we have engaged in preliminary negotiations with the patents holder to obtain a license thereunder. The negotiations have so far not produced any agreement and we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain a license on acceptable terms, if at all. Our inability to obtain a license, if needed, on commercially reasonable terms or to invalidate the claims would have a material adverse effect on our business and our future operations. (why would you negotiate to pay license royalties if your case was strong?)

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (7860)	7/5/1999 6:49:00 PM
From: Golden Bear	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11417

It gets worse... In January 1996, we received notice from a third party that claimed that our technology infringes upon U.S. and foreign patents it owned. These patents are also currently being litigated by third parties. We are not involved in these proceedings. This company offered to license its patents to us. We are currently obtaining information needed to investigate the merits of this claim. While we believe that there is a viable argument for non-infringement, if we are not able to show non-infringement, then we would require a license from this company to commercialize our technology. We cannot assure you that we would be able to obtain a license on acceptable terms, if at all. Our inability to obtain a license, if needed, on commercially reasonable terms would have a material adverse effect on our business and our future operations.

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (7860)	7/5/1999 6:51:00 PM
From: Witold	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11417

From my own experience, and I am an average person, I feel intimidated by just entering a computer / software store. The variety of software items sold there is mind boggling. Because of this info overload I just can't make up my mind what is a good bargain, and what is not. I typically "sniff" around the expensive stuff because I would like to use the best products. For example, I read the info on the box of "Adobe Shop" and the other similar software items but the price seemed just too high and I did not want to buy a cat in the bag! I did not see, during this one hour in Comp USA, a single customer that would purchase anything from these shelves! If I had all these programs displayed as WAVE-enabled program icons in front of me on my desktop I would just try them out once or twice. I would find the one which I really like. The speed and convenience is what counts here. AND WE ARE BYPASSING COMP USA and their profits go to Wave; customer pays the same price and gets all the convenience for NOTHING! Please also take note that Wave has a sliding scale and will keep only 10% for the more expensive items. How much does it cost to create CDs, pack them in boxes, ( and buy these boxes), store them in the factory then ship them to stores, interact with the stores, etc, etc. Versus, in the WAVE model all is simple and clean: click and try, click and buy. No shipment, storage, sale costs other then that 10-20% (for the more expensive items) going to Wave. Witold

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (7860)	7/5/1999 7:03:00 PM
From: Golden Bear	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11417

WAVX's management sums up the risks of this company quite nicely... (from the same filing) To achieve profitability we must, among other things: - Convince personal computer manufacturers and distributors of movies, games, financial information and other digital data and electronic content over the Internet to modify their offerings to be used with our products and services; - Convince consumers to choose to order, purchase and accept products using our products and services; The market for our services is still immature and is evolving rapidly. Our business will suffer if the market does not accept our products and services. Demand for our products and serviced could drop if: -8- - providers of products or information in electronic form over the Internet or personal computer manufacturers refuse to modify their offerings so that they may be used with our products and service; n providers of products or information in electronic form over the Internet refuse to change their business model to allow end-users to use our technology; - consumers don't choose to use our technology; or n competitors develop superior products or services. (well, if WAVX's product/service is as good as the LONGs say it is, and if they cannot defend their patents, it won't be long before VISA does sweep in and steal the market) Wow, lot's of risks for this company. Should I go long or short? gb