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: Golden Bear who wrote (7865)	7/5/1999 7:17:00 PM
From: webinfopro.com	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11417

Golden bear -- It is nice to see a short with an upbeat name for a change. However, if you are trying to scare us with the legal necessities of the SEC forms -- you don't understand the kind of board and group you are dealing with. I hope, for your sake, that by now you have started to get a different picture of the company and are doing some DD. It was a good thing to short this company two years ago....Now it is building a business that becomes more likely to succeed each passing day...No certainties in life, but this is a story stock.....After you cover, you should go long..... Weby

To: Golden Bear who wrote (7865)	7/5/1999 8:35:00 PM
From: SDR-SI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11417

Golden Bear, You have posted a number of verbatim items from Wave's company-prepared Risk Factors section of the S-1 and S-1/A's compiled by and filed by Wave and submitted to the SEC. Are you surprised by the fact that these issues are raised by the company? Are you surprised that they are in the S-1? Are you now seeing them for the first time? (They've been in the public domain for many weeks). Have you ever read an S-1 without such issues being identified and enumerated by the company? Why are you posting them as apparently unknown or surprise criticisms of the company? Certainly you must be aware that this a a company transitioning from R&D mode to deployment and operational mode, and that all these factors are to be expected. Further, it is not a surprise that both DEPLOYMENT and ACCEPTANCE are required for success. The company, itself, has made this very clear. Neither the company, itself, nor most of those who have posted in response to this weekends questions, would call this a "sure thing" or a "widows and orphans" stock. Please do not imply that either the company, or those who are long and who have provided the answers to your inquiries over the weekend, are advocating this as a solid, low risk position. It is this very fact that provides the level of volatility under which both short and long positions can ultimately be successful. I really don't want to be critical of you personally, but lets keep the information in the perspective in which it was prepared and published by the company itself. Steve