@Pinkie38 my take on the whole situation is that IAM is still too small / risky to engage. The two MOU's may potentially believe the product is the way forward for the industry but may require IAM to grow to a certain level before hand - as said at the road shows one of the "house hold name" financial licensees was 18/19 steps through their DD. Board approval was the final step - the board obviously went back to IAM with a number of steps to implement before services where on-boarded.
This therefore IMO bought forward the opening of the third BPO in Cebu IMO as it was a requirement for one of the MOU's to reduce any unnecessary risks. The way the big banks see it is they can mitigate risks by diversifying the locations IAM operates in.
No we look at the CTO working on a Client engagement and service ordering portal this IMO says they are now going for the low hanging fruit, accepting contracts at practice level to grow the business rather then targeting the licensee level as was the initial plan - biding their time while they meet the necessary requirements of the large licensees.
Now Sentry, the engagement process has obviously been positive with the increase from 6 to 15, but potentially not as well as first hoped. It seems that the on-boarding process requires a bit more work than initially thought and although being ahead of the business plan, is not as scalable as MF disclosed early on. If the technology is truly scalable the growth should be exponential.
Lastly, the NAB debacle was incredibly damaging for the company, they obviously needed to handle that situation better, and need advise on how to deal with the larger licensees on an ASX level. I hope that the trial with NAB went well, and they can see the benefit in the technology, but the current share price indicates that with MRs departure and the NAB debacle that there is more to the whole situation. I still hold and believe in the company but there needs to be some serious improvements in the way they engage shareholders (ie. not using IAMLTH to reach shareholders, use a more reputable media outlet), and also need to ensure they don’t "step" on anyone’s feet going forward.
