Ann: Full Year Statutory Accounts , page-21

albie as much as we would like it i dont think its mandatory for them to release top 20?

in relation to joewolfs comments on UWS trial update.. well alot of stocks i research on here its common practice in quarterlys half yearlys etc do show a reflection or recap on how past announced deals faired. INT has perhaps given notice to market of 10-12 deals since bob gestro appointment.

there has been various projects various partnering arrangments mentioned. and specific mention of projected revenues in set timeframes in most of these announcements to market.

it would be very much appreciated if they were commented on to market in terms of progess and completion, success or failure.

here is just one example

e.g: 6th august 2009
Intermoco Limited (ASX:INT) (Intermoco), a leading provider of energy and water
metering and management solutions and now voice and data through its Utiligy brand,
is very pleased to announce that the company has been awarded a five year contract
for the companys first embedded network that includes the supply of Voice and
Data.
The contract is for the supply and management of electricity, hot water, voice and
data to seventy-one apartments used for student accommodation in Hawthorn,
Melbourne. The contract which includes provision of all metering and
telecommunications hardware and the retailing of the electricity, hot water, phone
calls and internet access has a contract value in estimated to be in excess of $1.2M.


that ann goes on to say at that time there was 120 embedded networks online. my point is if u choose to pluck out a business highlight and ann to market a specific deal. then that conjurs stakeholder interest so u have an obligation to also report back to market the individual progess of each announced deal also. u cant choose to highlight individual deal when it suits u and then generalise it in a basked later on. once u tell shareholders about it on an item by item basis they build an expectation to want to read about it on an item by item basis.

it just looks very bad and poor for public relations if u dont. UWS isnt the only one there is perhaps 10-12 since the gestro team came onboard. i might be jumping the gun a little maybe current mgmt plan to do some kind or individual recap in the next half yearly or yearly?

no-ones perfect but some of these deals were announced in previous financial year and not commented on 'specifically' in last yearly report. to me that is bad press and negative to image.

i have to give credit where credit is due tho. last years annual report was the most thorough i have see from INT so far.

do u agree tho joewolf that if u suggest something like UWS trial was to commence in march 2010 that you should make specific reference and report on it individually in ur next half yearly or yearly being june 2010? thats my sentiment.

the last yearly was pretty thorough but mgmt needs to understand that if u chose to segregate a deal and voice it individually to market then is creates an expectation in ur stakeholder to be able to see specific progess commentary on it also.

atm its alot better then what it was as i will give credit that some of these were made reference to in last yearly but still some werent.

but as a shareholder.. dont confuse me with mention of nec partering.. 16mill of this or that over 2 to 3years.. and tell me about a dozen other individual contracts and then leave it up to me to decipher what is what at years end in the financials. mgmt need to show self accountability to build stakeholder trust IMO.