The following is IMO only, and as per my usual disclaimer I have NFI so please ignore (Or not) as you will. Rather than criticise or call names or threaten legal action perhaps try to critique instead
My analysis:
Interesting Ann. I have read it several times and taken time to absorb what it says (To me). The English language can be used in many ways to appear to say one thing straight up but there can be caveats if you know what to look for. I don’t always explain my thoughts very clearly which leads to many attacks on what are my honest opinions, perhaps poorly expressed. And of course, I am probably imagining things – As I say I’m a Ballsup with NFI
First up this is a very positive development for SPX and should begin to see an uptick in revenue. My thorny hide though has me looking twice at the following wording “Both parties (SPX and CAP) are Targetingan adoption rate of at least 50% of the member base (15,000 members) by 30 Sep 2025 on a best endeavour basis, which if successful will equate to annual recurring revenue of approx. $18m for SPX”
Does anyone else see the possibly cautionary words highlighted?This is a
target – NOT a given. Note the qualifier
if successful
And finally, “
on a best endeavour basis”
This is because it is not up to SPX or Cap if a member will take up a particular product on offer as members are independent businesses. Hence the qualifiers “If successful” and “On a best endeavour basis”. I have no doubt that the initial trials with selected clients were successful, hence the agreement and announcement.
Questions come to my mind such as “Who were the selected clients”. I think (Yes – Think – As I do
NOT know) that it is likely that, say, a dozen – or more – of the bigger clients were used to stress test the application to the highest standard possible. That would make sense if I was Cap. The Bigger the client, the more product lines, invoices, suppliers etc. would be involved so a good test of the systems – again, my opinion only
And obviously
swiftstatement passed, probably with flying colours! Hence this good Ann.
I don’t know the breakdown of Cap’s membership, but it would be fairly safe to say (Again – I do
NOT know) that there are a high proportion of small businesses (From 1 to 10? Employees) that are the base of the membership of Cap. So, could it
possibly be a case of ‘diminishing returns’ when it comes to uptake of the
swiftstatement subscription? Is this also why they are aiming for 15,000 not the whole membership? Why do I suggest diminishing returns? Bigger businesses will see bigger benefits faster and easier than smaller ones – IMO, if so the uptake after an initial surge MAY slow to a trickle or even stall after the bigger clients implement the agreement
From the Ann:
- Simple onboarding process
- Easy invoice mapping
- Fast accounting integration
- Automated invoice reconciliation
Sounds fab – I think the target of 15000 was used to put flesh onto the $99.00 / month to give some idea of the possible revenue if that many were to take it up (Note
possible, and
if)
I await the 4c to see how expenditure is going vs. revenue, so no comment on that. Final words – Positive? YES – Derisked? NO
Cheers,
Ballsup – by name and nature, IMO, NFA and as usual NFI
(20min delay)