I read the report and found it to be a bit lacking in substance,...

I read the report and found it to be a bit lacking in substance, very little on the financials, a lot of hearsay from ex employees, and mostly focusing on how much better the competition is! For example, the section saying that their camera mapping tech is inferior, when the basis for this is is that the NEA camera only has a 30 degree field of view, but the competitions camera works 180 degree. Therefore they can map faster. Even I can see there is a huge difference in the types of images creating when having a tight vertical view rather than an oblique view. I mean he even detailed how much better the competition were because they took photo's when the leaves weren't on the trees! Most of it was quite subjective and opinionated! I can feel a short squeeze coming on!