The way I see it is this: Sigfox is a gamble, no doubt. It's...

The way I see it is this:

Sigfox is a gamble, no doubt. It's startup, proprietary IP delivered by startup operators who have yet to prove their business models.

Meanwhile telcos like Telstra are rolling out networks with the same benefits (low power, long range, cheap hardware etc). Except their choice of tech (Cat-M, NB-IOT) runs on (and in parallel with) the same 4G infrastructure (= instant massive coverage) that smartphone users paying $100/month runs on (i.e. they leveraging high value applications from the same radio network, while other LP-WANs like Sigfox are exclusively targeting low value applications). And it's open standards. And it runs on licenced radio spectrum (much less risky than ISM band tech like Sigfox).

Why would any of CT1's potential target market invest in a big rollout of technology, where the cost of deployment is a significant part if the total cost, while there's a reasonable risk the underlying technology the solution it's based on will not be around in a year or 2 because it's startup IP operated by startup businesses with no proven business model and who are trying to compete with the likes of Telstra? As an executive you'd be mad to sign off on that!

DYOR. These are my opinions and observations only.