You ask for reasonable discussion, but in your very first sentence you refer to those who disagree with you as "trolls and hobgoblins." Doesn't bode well, does it? And in fact, that is the sort of attitude which has resulted in the lack of discussion which you say you find surprising. There used to be a fair bit of technical- and business-related debate in this forum, but anyone who presented a negative view got personally attacked with a level of venom and vitriol which immediately sent them running. Now, it is only those with rhinocerotic skins left. Which includes me, so I'll respond.
First, I think you should dispel these ideas you have about the imagery on the new website offering hints to the business. The new website is using a standard Wordpress theme with a standard Revolution Slider backdrop, and the backdrop consists of standard industry themed graphics delivered from Google video. It might well consist of drones and cities and agriculture and surgeons, but none of it is Netlinkz specific. There is no clue or teasers to any business plan in there.
Although Netlinkz did say in their last quarterly report that they now had 80 enterprise clients, they did not say that those clients are "using the software." For all your garrulous output in recent weeks, I don't think you ever once mentioned SSI. SSI were the software reseller which Netlinkz bought (or did a reverse takeover, depending on how you look at it) 2 years ago. About 18 months ago Netlinkz stopped separating out the figures from SSI in their reports, which conveniently muddied the waters. So now when they say Netlinkz has grown to 80 enterprise clients there is no way of knowing how many of those are VSN customers and how many are SSI customers re-buying subscriptions to Office 365, Microsoft Dynamics and other off the shelf packages. That is not a criticism of SSI's business model. They had a growing client list and were generating over $2m is annual revenue back in early 2020. But let us not fall into the carefully laid trap of assuming that positive figures from Netlinkz are down to the VSN product. So far there remains zero evidence that anyone at all has bought VSN, much less paid millions of dollars for it.
That is also, I suspect, the explanation for the recurring revenue figures. The reports are carefully worded to make us believe that we are seeing recurring revenue from VSN user subscriptions. Consider this statement from the last quarterly:
The proven benefit of the VSN 2.0 and Network-as-a-Service (NaaS) product offered to Enterprise clients has led to an accelerating shift of product/service mix from lower margin hardware sales and engineering integration services to repeat revenue based on migrating existing and new clients to the VSN NaaS. Recurring revenue for the quarter was over 80% of sales to Enterprise clients vs. 34% in Q1 FY2021.
Notice how the vague, undefined terminology like "proven benefit" and "accelerating shift" relating to the VSN is kept separate from the statement with figures describing recurring revenue growth? We are expected to conflate the two, but to do so would be to read in something which isn't actually stated. Netlinkz's reports and statements are masterclasses in these sorts of weasel words. My belief is that VSN is going nowhere and pretty much all recurring revenue is coming from SSI's growth in the channels. There have been no clear statements to the contrary from Netlinkz.
Why am I so negative on VSN? It started off as the VIN, and it was fundamentally flawed. No one was ever going to buy it. They tried to sell it via Telstra, and Blue Tech, and China Telecom (with or without 10,000 sales people). No one bought it. They renamed it to VSP and now it is called VSN. It is not clear how much of the VIN technology is left in it but any which way there is still no reason to believe they have a product that anyone will ever buy. They just hide the zero sales behind SSI muddied waters and weasel words in the reports.
Even if there was a credible product, why would any large company risk using it? There were arguments presented earlier in the month about how a company like Nike might use it in their stores or offices. All fine arguments, at least in theory, but they rather ignored the fact that every large company on the planet already has a perfectly serviceable secure communications system, probably supplied by Cisco or someone of similar standing. So what would be the reason for any such company to replace their working infrastructure with an unproven package created by JT and his bunch of Chinese hackers? There is no such reason, so the idea of companies Nike, VW or JD replacing their Cisco kit with VSN is absurd.
At the turn of the year they told us they were participating in tenders exceeding $600m. How many did they win? Exactly zero is my guess. If they had something to boast, believe me they would be shouting it from the rooftops. Instead, silence. Recycled revenue from the Chengdu water project, SSI income and whatever other "consulting, design and implementation" revenue they can get from iSoftStone will only take them so far, which is why quarter by quarter revenue is falling away so rapidly.
Expand
(20min delay)