How weak is Wave's most recent forecast? Let me count the ways.
The manner of distribution of relevant information: a material change of the sales target for 2012 should be shared with all investors, not mentioned casually in conversations with two privileged Wavoids.
Difference with recent forecast: Instead, Wave's Q4 unsafe harbour $60m (reasonably ambitious target) has become $50m as if nothing has happened.
The difference is profound.
Ambition: A $50m forecast for the Safend-Wave combination implies lack of traction and a want of ambition for a company which made revenue of $11m in Q4.
Profitability: The cost structure implies an estimate of $60m of expense in 2012, so a $50m revenue target suggests an expectation of repeat losses this year. Rather different from the Q4 CC.
US Performance: What is left of $50m for the US if EMEA ($14-30m) and Dell ($20m) are what they are claimed to be? At best, this implies flat revenues in the US ($16m). At worst, none.
Hiring decision: So at best, flat revenues in the US tells you that hiring the sales team was either (a) a waste of time, or (b) the old sales team has become unproductive.
Accuracy: As it happens, the estimate of European sales in 2011 is noticeably inaccurate. BASF and BP are European companies. Between them, they contributed more than the amount assigned to EMEA sales.
Implications: If what occurs at the Q2-3 barrier only permits Wave to reach its target of $50m, then whatever else they are doing likely amounts to almost nothing on top of what they were doing in 2011.
Demand: If Wave in the US needs twice as many people to generate the same number of sales, then there's likely little business to be had.
Productivity: This also means a measure of productivity on a per sales person basis shows a steep decline.
Segment Information: If 9 people in Europe generate $14-30m, the decline is catastrophic in the US. Why are Wave's US sales people so unproductive?
Incentives: The only region that has an ambitious target for itself is in Europe. Why would the board offer bonuses to anyone running the rest of the business?
Nepotism: Which takes you back to the question of family preference.
This is why talking about Wave on a financial basis is disspiriting. The unimpeded technology conversation makes you believe the sky is the limit.
But frankly, the whole financial conversation which - as reported - appears to issue from the CEO seems reliably useless.
Participating in a conversation about a company in which only one geographic segment has ambitions for growth and in which the CEO appears incapable of consistency is a waste of my time.
They talk as if what they are saying is impressive.
Makes you want to weep for the company this ought to be capable of being.
| 