What is certain, is that this company is not investment grade at...

What is certain, is that this company is not investment grade at all but rather highly speculative.
It hasn't turned a consistent profit and it's hard to interpret the information as well.
Normally they say if you can't understand a business, one should not be invested in it.
My take on it is, that at present it will do well if it can remain afloat and meet it's own expenses without tapping investors for more cash.
Granted a lot of the company expenses are for a business that has been growing significantly with any potential returns to flow over the coming years.
Growing pains, one might say.
A lot hinges on how well the case selection was and if the contracts were written in a manner that is favorable.
The exponential growth for a company with an new unproven profitable business record is a risky move.
One that might pay off but it's risky nevertheless.
I just hope Raymond van Hulst is a savvy level headed operator. His past indicates this and he seems to be much more conservative than Saker. He also has plenty of skin in the game to try and turn this company around. He's even been buying more stock. So if it was mired in doubt he may not have done this.
Saker was certainly full of confidence and ambitious, a great business builder psychology, but these people also many times need to be brought to earth with the realities of running a profitable business. I think Hulst is the right man for the job but can he turn it around, that's the question.