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: Oliver Hahn who wrote (6975)	5/23/1999 9:39:00 AM
From: Jesse Livermore	Respond to of 11417

Oliver, the first skeptic with an IQ above 100 I have seen in a long time. This is refreshing. Oliver, I read all of your posts. Good work but you are about 6 months behind the times. When the price was $3 I was where you are in my thinking. I decided the only way to know that execution was within the realm of reason was what the street said. Therefore, I figured a market cap of 300 million or stock price around $10 would indicate sufficient insiders are putting their money down to suggest success has a reasonable probability. We are all fairly intelligent like you Oliver, we admit we don't know what is going on inside the company or the industry. Paradigm shifts seldom follow a road map anyway. They are seldom well funded. They kind of just happen serendipitously. So here we are with a market cap of $600,000,000 on the NASDAQ BB with no earnings having burned $56,000,000 in 10 years. Why Oliver do we have a market cap of $600,000,000? I submit to you that some people in the business know some things that skeptics and bulls don't. Good luck and happy investing. Keep them honest Oliver but don't let it cost you too much money. There is a time and place for all things, a time for bears and a time for bulls, a time to buy and a time to sell, a time to gather information and a time to act on it. Oliver it is time to act.

To: Oliver Hahn who wrote (6975)	5/23/1999 9:55:00 AM
From: Harold Lehman	Respond to of 11417

Oliver, if this company is very questionable in some of its methods, as you seem to believe, then why is Steve Case, through AOL, making an investment in Wave? I suspect that these guys do due diligence at least as well as any of us and found something they liked. Regards, Harold

To: Oliver Hahn who wrote (6975)	5/23/1999 9:59:00 AM
From: SDR-SI	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11417

It would be hard to offer much more than has already been so clearly stated by Snackman, Trippi, Weby, 24601, Wildman and Wooly and others, but I think that your comments on WAVX have missed an important point that has not been rebutted by the others. You have indicated several times that you have seen no data on production estimates, chip yields, board design tests, and other data related to the physical production of chips. I believe that such questions indicate a lack of understanding of WAVX's corporate goals, one which should have come through loud and clear in your review of available information. Specifically, WAVX's goal is not to be a chip or board producer. WAVX future is as a SERVICE COMPANY . As such, any specific chip production is for demonstration and proof of concept purposes only. The company's intent is not even to have its principal inclusion on pieces of equipment be through identifiable "WAVE CHIPS", but to have a Wave functionality included in and embedded into numerous type of chipsets being manufactured by numerous manufacturers for numerous and varied types of applications and equipment. The income objective of Wave derives from the future servicing and proliferation of the e-commerce and other activities enabled by the Wave concept, not from the selling of chips and not from royalties of others selling the chips. The hoped-for natural progression of recognizeabililty of the physical functionality of the Wave system is one in which the Wave identity literally disappears into ubiquity. In a way we are already experiencing (and suffering to a degree) from such a positioning. Many people get very nervous when a previously announced partnering company does not prominently re-announce WAVE as an important part of their ongoing announcements. However, as I have pointed out before, does a company like HP keep announcing who their BIOS supplier is? who the chip manufacturer that makes its I/O chipsets is? Who the cabinet maker that they use is? In short, when reviewing the Wave business plan, concentration must be placed on its ability to attain three goals: UNIVERSALITY (which will be evidenced as announcements are made) UBIQUITY (which will be evidenced as we disappear into expectation of inclusion without mention) SERVICE (the income from which will be the principal revenue and earnings generation sources for the company). If the future of these concepts is not sufficiently promising for you and the movement toward these concepts is not sufficiently demonstrated for you by the company, then at least at this time a continuing, long term Wave investment probably does not fit your personal risk/reward criteria. There is nothing wrong with that and we can't be critical of that, its just different than ours. Steve

To: Oliver Hahn who wrote (6975)	5/23/1999 11:35:00 AM
From: Klingerg	Respond to of 11417

Oliver and other "Newbies"...In case no one has brought this to your attention this was posted on RB and is a pretty good review of WAVX. Hope it helps.... sba.muohio.edu Finally, as someone who has had experience on the 'Street', complete with an MBA (so I was well versed in fundamental analysis in determining valuations), and employment as a 'corfin jock at a bulge bracket firm', I have been at a loss to make the numbers work in determining internet valuations. However as an analyst mentioned in Fortune this week, the father's of fundamental analysis, Graham and Dodd in their 1934 book "Security Analysis", mention the following which might help anyone determining whether or not to make an investment in WAVX ..... "....Unseasoned companies in new fields of activity...provide no sound basis for the determination of intrinsic value....Analysts serve their discipline best by identifying such companies as highly speculative and not attempting to value them....The buyer of such securities is not making an investment, but a bet on a new technology, a new market, a new service....Winning bets on such situations can produce very rich rewards, but they are in an odds-setting rather than a valuation process..." A personal amendment that I would have to mention. Take it as such, a personal opinion, no more no less. When one is determining the 'odds' in terms of WAVX make sure you have a proper compilation of all the intangibles, or 'non-intrinsic' factors attributable to this stock versus other internet (Read as other "unseasoned companies in new fields of activity") market investments. Examine long term sustainable competitive advantage, management, other investors etc.. This process may help you in becoming comfortable with the "odds" and your "speculative' investment.

To: Oliver Hahn who wrote (6975)	5/23/1999 11:55:00 AM
From: Marty Lee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11417

Good Morning Oliver. I'll be brief. Good job Oliver. You're quite the skeptic indulging us with your own best devil's arguments against all chance of success and all good news to the contrary. Although, as you are long on WAVX despite your wonderful powers of skeptical analysis, I'll assume you've reserved some of your skepticism for itself. Some of your points are taken well. The company has had a lot to overcome and challenges yet to come. Other portions of your skeptic's argument seem stressed and stretched a bit; boarding on outright pessimism rather than a skeptic's cool reserve. Oh well Oliver, you seem as prepared as myself and other WAVX investors for something extraordinary. As George Gilder observes, "Sprague's technology moves with the domonetic tide." As many rocks as you wish to throw against it, it will just keep coming in. Best, Marty

To: Oliver Hahn who wrote (6975)	5/23/1999 12:29:00 PM
From: snackman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11417

Oliver, I guess my question is "Why are you here"? There are so many biotech stocks out there and thousands and thousands of stocks to choose from. Why are you here? Do you feel obligated to "help" all of us from self destruction? Are we all going to go over the cliff together? There is no question this is a speculative stock. As Jesse Livermore once said when we were at $4.00 our chances were 40% we would make it. As we rose to $10.00 the risk diminished. We are not a 100 % sure thing yet, buy this summer, when inTelecast is rolled out tested, and when ALL the broadcasters want in, then I think we can say the speculation is over and we have a company that will survive, thank you. You still did not address the patents. Why has Intel or IBM or anyone of the gorillas not gone around us? Intel has already confirmed that hardware is a must over software for security. They have even publicly stated that they are 1 ½ to 2 years away from having their own chip. If that enough time for us to get established? Me thinks so. And that fact that Intel has validated the concept should sound bells and whistles in your head. I am sure you are not here to help the small and weak. I am sure you are not here to waste time or for the entertainment of it all. Therefore, I suspect you have an agenda. Is that correct? I really don't expect you to answer that, but there can be no other conclusion. Nice having you around for a couple of days, but I would suggest you try your ploy on a less sophisticated group of people. You are bucking heads with people that have done their DD for the past three years. We know what we have and where we are going. I think we can survive without your help, but many thanks anyway. Snackman

To: Oliver Hahn who wrote (6975)	5/23/1999 3:33:00 PM
From: Trippi	Respond to of 11417

Oliver -- You are hopelessly mired in the past -- you continue to bring forth DD that many here have done months ago. Many of your doubts have been asked and answered to mine and others satisfaction. You can not make a man board a Boeing 747 when he has never heard of the Wright Brothers -- and believes anything made from something as heavy as metal can not fly. You take a 5 pound block of steel and drop it to the ground and proclaim it as evidence that anything made of metal will not fly. Your argument has merit. It even seems well founded to the unaware. But none the less, you are wrong. I have said my piece. I have nothing against doubt, questioning and negative comment -- when they have merit. Your comments lack that final ingredient for me. There are sign posts everywhere that point to where this company is going to take us -- most of it is in the public domain and available to anyone who looks for it. Like I've said in a previous answer to your posts -- there is no way to prove who is right. Many here bought our tickets early, others paid more to get on board. But there will always be those standing at the gate carrying a 5 pound piece of steel and a ton of doubt -- that never really get it. That's OK with me. Maybe 20 million chips from now -- we will have the revenue and earnings growth and guaranteed survival that you require. Want to see deployment in the millions? Watch. But once you see them -- you will be paying much much more for WAVX. I won't be responding anymore -- your language is inflamatory and phrased to cast doubt and fear. Get more blocks of steel ready for anyone who pays attention to your posts. In a matter of months it will be clear how wrong you are. Trippi