I’m sure everyone will have a reaction/response/opinion on this...

I’m sure everyone will have a reaction/response/opinion on this announcement. And I suspect it’s going to be much stronger than just ‘disappointment’.

My out of the blocks reaction/question to the HC community - is the SFI Board of Jason Marinko, Simon Cope, Shannon Robinson and Martin Ripple incompetent or delinquent in allowing things to get to this position?

Spookfish decided to run with a low risk – low reward strategy and license their proprietary technology to an existing operator in the world’s largest market; meaning they gave up ownership of clients and ownership of data and a big chunk of equity in exchange for development funding, no cost market entry and ongoing royalties.

Note the use of circa (~) because precise details of Private Equity transactions are hard to find and validate but the numbers mentioned are found through announcements and simple Google searches.

After purchasing ~10 Spookfish camera systems over the past ~12 months accompanied by announcements that “all was fine” Eagleview appear to have not paid any royalties. “Red Alert – warning Will Robinson!”. What Licence Agreement allows for this? Surely, it had a trigger clause for payments to flow!

In 2015 Vista acquired Eagleview for ~ $700m.
In 2018 Vista sold ~ half of Eagleview to Clearwater Capital for $2.2 billion

Both Vista and Clearwater stated that they are committed to growing Eagleview’s business through advanced capture systems (SFI) technology and through the development machine learning and artificial intelligence capabilities.

Vista have got their money back and a very healthy uplift.
Clearwater did not drop a couple of billion $$$s to not own the technology and not have ambitions of global domination of the space.

One does not need to be a genius to work out with a high degree of certainty that Eagleview were always intending on making a play for SFI. If they could prove for themselves that the SFI tech performed and they could strangle SFI’s cash position then, with the resulting share price at near 12-month lows, they can acquire for a rock bottom price.

With this obvious corporate play, what was the SFI board doing to create competitive tension? They’ve had at least 12-18 months to develop strong relationships with other potential suitors/partners. Again, a quick Google search provides an obvious candidate in Hexagon Geospatial; a successful ~ $15 billion market cap company formed in Sweden in 1975.

I seem to recall that Eagleview has preferred rights on new territories SFI sought to enter. Whilst in 2018 Eagleview have plans to globalise, 12 months ago they didn’t have any presence in Europe and did not have Clearwater’s new money.
Monaco-based Stuart Nixon (Nearmap founder and paid SFI advisor) has history with Hexagon and most other major geospatial companies. Has he opened any doors?
Last quarter SFI extended the Vincent Tao China opportunity to 10 August. To extend the evaluation timeframe, the SFI Board must have given credence to the opportunity. What is the status of this?

And now I’m back at my original question in the earlier paragraph…incompetence, delinquency, asleep at the wheel or something else we aren’t privy to (technology issues? Company in-fighting or power plays?)

What are your thoughts on the performance of the Board in allowing SFI to be in this position? Have they been outplayed? And thoughts on the lack of competitive suitors? And why recommend a limp roll over for 8c?