....Getswift's defense team missed the point...once again.......

....Getswift's defense team missed the point...once again.... fast asleep if you ask me....unprepared...

..55k terminals on the books...that was in Jan 2017...only 3000 were deemed 'active' using Albert (on that specific day)... questions should have been....

1. What is his definition of 'retail'....this category data was based on sector...and retail was one of the probable 1000 sectors... so 'retail' means different things to different people...how many of the other sectors (per CBA's data) could potentially be applicable as well to Getswift?
2. how many Albert terminal are there now in 2020 (extrapolated CAGR)?
3. how many 'inactive' Albert terminals were there at that time (Jan 2017)- they only referred to 'active' ones....?
4. How many 'inactive' ones are there now (extrapolated CAGR);
5. What is the Albert terminal CAGR.... uptake?
6. Say this partnership attracted more customers to use CBA's Albert going forward.... what is the synergistic CAGR of such an announcement based on the product' team research?

...so if you look at the calcs....using 55K assumption over 5 years is plausible.... who knows....these announcements & their business model are based on so many assumptions... boils down to uptake.... based on prospectus....so that risk is mitigated... no guarantees....in the end...

...they should have probably used the word 'could'...not 'will' in the announcement.... and there is a bit of ambiguity pertaining the word 'transaction value'....but $9Billion was academic.... everyone knows that that is a estimate based on ~3,000,0000,0000 variables....just take pre-post Covid 19 impact....that is just one variable....

...anyway....all good... today proved once again that ASIC & CA do not have a case... waste of money to continue pursue this based on the latest revelations....

...my 2 cents....