On the positive side, at least the last 2 contracts have been...

On the positive side, at least the last 2 contracts have been real dollar amounts for goods/services that Pointerra will provide under a contract rather than the rather dubious model they have of people agreeing to use their platform, loading some data in there, and then never actually using it and therefore not paying for the service (well apart from paying 3DP who pay AWS for hosting that data.......3DP have been making very little money or actually losing money on those deals given their sales, development and overhead costs).

Perhaps this is the model they need to use......3DP staff who actually know how they software works advises clients/others on how best to use the digital twin data

Having said that, we need to understand Olsen's little spin - the analysis, modelling, investment scenario will be done by the utilities with experts from the universities.......3DP digital twin is being used to understand the issue and to then enable modelling (I'm assuming it can do that or will have to be developed to do that). 3DPs fee is for the acquisition and injestion of the data and then the use of their software tools (perhaps someone from their advisory department), but it would be fanciful to imagine that anyone at 3DP is an expert in climate change, making assets resilient, and/or the economic modelling. The 1.6m is for data, storage, software.....and perhaps giving them exposure to these utilities and experts may generate some sales leads.

So let us all be realistic about what this means......one off contract like the last one with FPL.........they need to fix the issue of large clients using their platform on an ongoing basis who are going to pay monthly and build up that ARR or whatever Olsen wants to refer to it this year