Ann: Trading Halt, page-69

And this is the fundamental thing that starts to wind me up, so i pull back and stop reading these threads.

Posters/investors don't (or don't try/want to) understand the business strategy. It's not even that difficult: invest to get market share and dominance in a geography, achieve profitability, use profitability to fund expansion into new geography, continue until market dominance is achieved in all practical/profitable geographies, be global behemoth.

It is actually very ballsy, and yes, risky. Although i am long, i am not 100% they can do it globally, but i am prepared to chance it as the rewards are insane.

However, to achieve it means although individual geographies are mad profitable (ANZ), the overall company remains unprofitable as they continue to use profits to fund expansion.

I have a feeling that maybe when NA becomes profitable, posters will still be posting the same complaints as now. Don't expect buckets of dividends if scale is achieved in NA, because (unless management change the strategy in the future), NA will likely fund expansion to Asia and/or Europe.

Insto's seem to get it, hence they are happy to fund NEA. It is the Amazon model transplanted to NEA. Can they do it as well as Amazon? That's a big call and undecided in my view, but again, the rewards if they succeed...