@thelearner , I think the issue is that Risiko is berating the thread (in general terms) but he has not stated a basis for his position. He is critiquing the company without knowing much at all about it.
"Think for a minute, does one really think that in a decades-old industry, a tiny coy is going to race past all the incumbents with similar plans or greater, who never thought of an obvious market, can reach target coverage sooner, and who have deep expertise and hip-pockets?"
....is uninformed about what SAS does, and why others haven't done it. It's also completely ignoring what it can do, and why others haven't done it yet. Transportation was a centuries-old industry, and the internal combustion engine didn't do to badly. This industry is old, the tech is not.
"as it stands is heavily predicated on a yet to be proven and perilous launch platform, further CR &/or dilutive partnership/s, and a problem-free pathway to future earnings."
......so basically you're describing every start-up resource exploration company, ever. Never been keen on the prospects of a mining company Risiko? I've weighed the risks you describe (you obviously have not) and I am very happy to be bullish. If none of the above risks you have cited existed, I would still be very bullish, but I may not want to pay $2 per share to get a piece of the action.
"One can amuse oneself endlessly projecting eye-watering numbers, like Gerard Depardieu in Jean de Florette, but it's way too early to count the banknotes imho"
...no one has counted the banknotes, Risiko. The only figure anybody has - aside from the minor Satspace Africa deal - is 'possible' revenue $300-$500million when half the constellation is deployed. I honestly view that as just a number, I have no clue as to how to verify its accuracy, so I don't really swing off it. I do know that the 'number', whatever it may be, is a hell of a lot bigger than $660k, and will be available year on year. My confidence for their revenue stream stems from that. On what basis do you doubt it, other than throwing a dart and hoping you hit the target? Chiding another's confidence is okay, but you can't just say "you're over confident because I say you are". Back it up with something other than uninformed opinion, because you are preaching caution to people whose opinion is not uninformed. If you have something to test my confidence with, spell it out, I'd like to know that information, and will grant you any point you raise if it is valid
"I'd be very surprised it (sic) they've got the same propensity as Kodak to fail to recognise both a threat and an opportunity."
....to whom is SAS a threat? Respectfully, I don't think you have done any research at all into this company. To whom are you referring in this statement? How does the SAS model threaten them? Which company will the nano-sat constellation bury? Can you name even one? Again, if you can do so I'd be very keen to hear it, I would like to know who you think SAS will send out of business with the business plan - vis a vis the Kodak reference. Regarding opportunity, Google M2M, IoT, narrowband communication, equatorial mobile coverage and form a picture of the timeframes. That should give you a far better picture of the company's future than you currently have
Personally, I am VERY keen to hear dissenting opinion as it helps to inform me about a company I have invested cash in, but Risiko's post - at least the one that includes the above quotes - does nothing other than inform me that he hasn't done nearly as much research into the company as I have, and his opinion has to be weighted accordingly. Ergo, some people might arc up when they read it
