« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: tkc

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Sat, 31 Mar 12 7:05 PM | 42 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix
Msg. 07152 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 07151 by tkc)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Hi tkc,

How do you reach the conclusion that the bonuses are not accrued for?

I think folks should stop think of bonuses as being performance-related for anything other than tax purposes. This is what they get paid, pure and simple. I think they are overpaid, cashwise, but it isn't going to change all the same.

Re headcount - thought I read/heard 250 and that the surge is over.

Error (1) - The deferred revenue increase is one of those technical recognition issues with complex software contracts. The revenue is merely deferred to future periods. Wave is hiring a specialist accountant who understands the complexity of this kind of accounting - so this isn't simple, but in my view, it also isn't too worrying.

Error (2) - The remaining issue is over the collectability of some aged debts. Not sure why this wasn't picked up earlier, as invoices age very visibly: so there's an upfront due diligence issue which is the responsibility of the acquisition auditor, in my view; and then there's a year-end reporting issue, which may affect the standing of whoever is controlling finances at Safend. Sounds like it was turned up by the (possibly new) auditor at year-end. That's one of the purposes of the audit - so the problem was caught in the third stage of Safend's financial control when it should have emerged in both of the other two. The problem simply couldn't be resolved in the timescale available, and that tells me Wave should try to accelerate its reporting schedule. In Feeney's shoes I'd be disappointed and embarrassed, but I'd likely conclude it was an isolated and fixable teething issue.

I suspect they'll look to get some portion of the bad debt money back from Safend's principals in a conversation between lawyers.


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: tkc
By: tkc
in ALEA
Sat, 31 Mar 12 6:30 PM
Msg. 07151 of 54959

No alarm CF, just Steam blowing at the casualness w/ which the family spends money and operates while their docile benefactors continue homage. Nothing new there. Another attempt to incite rebellion? Probably. Sure I read those elsewhere who disdain Wave to garner their reactions as a few (3 or 4) of them are actually smart - others I mostly ignore. As to your numbers: I doubt "pari passu" works. There was a statement in there someplace that put Wave's headcount at 270 (can't find it now). Anyway, there will be annual raises and bonuses (not accrued for) beginning in Q1 as there always has been. I expect expenses to increase. As to licensing, I have no idea if, how or when the change in Dell's agreement will affect revenue. I do however think that was a material event and should have been disclosed and now more than ever believe Wave needs an Operator. I'm okay w/ Feeney too, but he shouldn't get an incentive bonus. That $1M mistake should cause some penalty. Additionally I suspect it resulted from time constraints which I see as further evidence that Management is spread too thin and/or lacking in operational expertise/experience. Anyway, let's hope significant new revenue starts soon and Feeney's CC statements regarding 2012 expenses hold true so the SP gets where I'm happier and can move some WAVX money into Con Ed or ATT. javascript:emoticon('Cool')


« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next