Hi tkc,
Well, I'd like to ask that you note my timescale: I am giving it to the end of 2011. I am merely giving notice of my intentions, for the little that they are worth. If I remember correctly, in 2010 SKS suggested he had five major new deals in the works, and he produced an upgrade to an existing relationship as well as a second respectable sale. In 2011 it became 15-20 and he has produced nothing so far. His delivery rate relative to the expectations he creates remains pretty miserable. This is a shame.
I think I've consistently not trusted the safe harbour for longer than you have been an investor; and since before even bluefang became negative. I used to argue with him from the other side of the long divide. I was sceptical of Steven's expectations game way back in the HhH era, and as far as I recall, I have never changed that position.
But set all that aside. This is merely the unsafe harbour, whose character we know. I have long contended that there is another story which is genuinely grounded in reality, and which has an opportunity to be correct. It is based on what I have thought was a market need, whose pursuit I have measured using reported numbers and factual, auditable, legally-binding information. And that is the story which I have tried to have lead my level of optimism.
I increased the value in my optimismometer because, after the renewal/upgrade by GM, I understood that Wave's product was apparently saleable. If GM is followed, not by a gradual opening of the sluice gates, but by a trickle, then I can only conclude that Wave's product remains unappealing to prospective customers. That would suggest no breakthrough, after all. The GM deal must have unique or rare characteristics. You need more than a few swallows to make a summer. BASF is a quarter of a reasonable increase in order flows, and while it was a bit later than I would have hoped, it was still a new customer along a timeline that had time to accelerate. That acceleration isn't appearing thus far. And there now needs to be more to convince me that what Wave wants to sell is what the market wants to buy in numbers.
I don't claim to know why this is so, and certainly SKS has done a miserable job in explaining it. Excuses made to define the CEO's innocence of responsibility fail to impress. This is his product. It isn't the market's fault that he hasn't sold it. He is responsible for its success and for its failure.
On the other hand, I guess the timing of a shift in my opinion matters to me. I am not convinced the folks who are already sceptical about Wave's prospects are right to be so just yet. It's just a bit too soon for that. There's still room for success here. Just.
But if by year-end, there are less than four major sales, my optimismometer is going to need serious revision. I think it will be safe to presume the company hasn't got something many companies really want as yet - at least at the price at which it is offered. And in my view, the company would certainly need a new leader who is willing to rethink what Wave is doing. Knowing the end-point you wish to reach doesn't tell you how to make the journey.
| 