Ann: December Quarterly Activities Report, page-107

> so they’ll basically never be in a position to make the BNPL profitable unless it becomes absolutely massive in scale
Like Openpay? Oh.

BNPL can never be profitable with scale which is why they haven't bothered. I thought that was obvious by now.
This is why they have activities other than BNPL.

>Just to cover the quarterly cash burn of $2.5M, at 2.7% NTR they need to be doing TTV per quarter of $92.5M!
(Would you think IOU lacks the capacity to do these calculations themselves? )
To attain that they would need to have looser credit criteria which would increase their bad debt which would increase the TTV requirement etc etc.. I agree. BNPL is not profitable at scale, that's just a fact of the matter.


As I said to Kev. You can talk about the cash burn rate but some is development, and not opex.

I'm not trying to just be a naysayer here but tell me what percent of the 2.5 million expenditure is necessary to run and maintain BNPL and iSentric and what percent is development effort.

IOU has trash communication. You and Kev etc while you're not incorrect on the numbers unfortunately there's a pretty unfounded assumption in there about what the expenditure is for. We can't know either way.

So. Yes.. They can't keep spending money this way. I'd imagine they will probably stop before they run out, just a hunch.


> Now you know why IOU keep pushing their ‘debt warehouse’ funding milestone further and further into the future.
I pretty much have been consistent on message that BNPL is a marketing exercise and not a direct money making endeavour.

So, while you're right, it really is irrelevant. Frankly I think they should stop talking about it - they only do it because most investors do not seem to have come to the conclusion that scaling BNPL is a tried and tested formula for capital loss.

Again, IOU has bad investor communications, this is a great example of it.