Valuation Comparison, page-135

Again you misrepresent the facts, all these products where released and failed due to being exposed to consumer and market scrutiny.

ALL the examples you listed failed AFTER release, plus companies like Apple and Microsoft did NOT "spin" about the products a year in advance.
We only ever know about Apple products during Key note presentations not a year earlier.

So did CAT release the smart ball technology? NO! so why market a product that was never released as an actual product?
Have CAT released VECTOR yet? so why promote it on the ASX?

As for RWC1, you are obsessed with statsports, you keep referring to them over and over again, i don't care if they have 90 or 900 staff or turnover of £1 million or £100 million, the truth is you dont have a clue either.
What is amazing is the effort you go too when "investigating" statsports but go to little effort when scrutinising CAT, you are certainly NOT objective in any way.For the record its CAT we have the stock in!!

But if as you say stats do have 90 staff and £10 million turnover, does that not shame CAT further because they have been able to to get substantial investment over £10 million (Ref SteveRattaray) And at a valuation of £200 which is more than CAT's current value, despite CAT's 389 staff and $76 million turnover.
Maybe this is because stats are profitable, have better technology and better clients which Steverattaray points out regularly.

Your credibility is even less with ridiculous statements about "you heard statsports offered their devices for almost nothing"

How do you know? Plus how can they possibly be profitable and have £10 million turnover (your numbers) if they are giving away their devices free?

Your statement about "unqualified investors" is also non sensible, do you really think players who earn $30 million a year don't have advisers!!!
in fact Raheem Sterling references his advisers in his quotes.
https://statsports.com/oxlade-chamberlain-and-sterling-become-statsports-investors/

Can i ask if the CAT picture is so good and the numbers so amazing why would 4 CFO's leave in just over 2 years? these guys also had options so would have huge incentive to stay (and earn lots of money) if they thought the numbers where good, so why did ALL 4 leave? ALL 4!!
Why if the numbers are great did the CEO leave, again financially he would have done well (by staying) Also i am sure its not good for his ego to walk away after only 18 months. You see these facts don't correlate with the narrative you guys are swallowing or the narrative you guys are promoting, not sure which it is.

If CAT has such a great future why cant they get an new CEO or CFO? Would this not be a great opportunity for a few executives to make a name for themselves and get well paid!

SteveRattaray claims to have ASX and sports industry experience and a five minute google search confirms this so i will believe him 100 times over unanimous bloggers who could actually be CAT staff. Almost every point he makes i support and agree with.

the facts are Stats have raised £15 million which is about $26 million so they have less overheads and more cash than CAT at present and have (on the face of it) the better product (VECTOR looks very like its trying to replicate Stat devices)
So if stats are giving devices away free, that's also not good for CAT!!

I think a capital raise is now inevitable just to survive the rush for a land grab over the next few years.