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: GerryMiles who wrote (4417)	10/29/1998 4:42:00 AM
From: Paul Schmidt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11417

Gerry, "I believe by the time COMDEX roles around and daytraders have been eliminated or severely decreased we will see a moderate increase in share price" Who knows. I actually think we will start to attract more opportunistic longs and if we get on NASDAQ above 5 dollars, we will see more shorting (instead of MM manipulation) who will spot the volatility of the stock,on top of which apparently sticks religiously to the "buy the rumour sell on the news" sort of action. Add to that the possibility that even committed longtermers may start to change their investment behaviour to improve their positions, while revenues would appear to be some way off still. So taken together I think we are moving into even more high jinks. I have just received my proxy voting papers (living in the UK, see). I would like the thead to reconsider the issues put before us again in light of the announcement and fairly paltry response to it, which I think many people are not surprised at, since the possibility was bandied about for months. 1) Wave asks for approval of a plan to increase the Class A stock from 50 to 75 million (correct?). Currently the market seems to have assigned wavx a trading range of 2.5 - 4.0. Diluting the shares to 75 million with hardly any revenue to come soon, should surely follow to a lower trading range (2-3.5?). How would that square with the aim of getting off the BB ie meet NASDAQ requirements? The only way my little brain can understand issuing 25 million extra shares, it would be to make way for a large investor that would provide such a boost in confidence, that it would make up for the dilution in shares. Clearly, because of the complex concepts involved (and as the lack of response to such a good announcement shows), hoping to bootstrap the company up to a position where it can finance its expansion by selling shares publicly following a number of publicity generating deals with OEMS, would be a very shaky foundation to stake the future of the company on. Now, as I have seen with other shares, the route to going bust is to dilute the shares out beyond credibility, where even (fool)hardy small investors start to shy away. If the plan to dilute to 75 million goes ahead (which I assume it will), then wavx Class A's will have diluted 3 fold in the year I have held the shares (25 to 75 million. There has to be therefore an utterly compelling reason to warrant this move, one that will make a revenue stream an attainable reality in a way that can be sold to the investing public. 2)Wave is asking to raise the limiton stock options for employees from 100 000 to 500 000 in any given year. That seems to me huge potential bonuses to mere employees of the (revenueless) company. The visionaries and executive of the company deserve all the credit and wealth that no doubt will follow, but surely the employees are just making an honest job of it. Even at $2 per share a 100 000 stock options are attractive, never mind at $50 a share. OK, so probably this option will probably only be used to attract some high flying exec to help execute "the next step". However, should this person not also come with a sense of commitment. I for one would want to vote against this motion - even just for the sake of registering my disapproval. There are investors on this thread that have supported this company for years. There will be no stock options for them. At least the motion should be deferred until a revenue stream looks attainable. As andrew said this ride is going to be truly fascinating! Paul