Big client doesn't necessarily mean big deal. In fact, if ITE...

Big client doesn't necessarily mean big deal. In fact, if ITE are getting the deal then it's likely to be a small deal, especially when they don't indicate the value of the contract. E.g., the understanding is that HSBC was a tiny deal (very small overall budget, SUV spin-off that needed a risk system for ratings purposes), so small that most of the big vendors didn't bother getting out of bed for it. (This was reflected in the lousy Euro licensing figures in their reports. With the exchanges and semi-gov clients they don't carry a lot of traded risk and so they go for a bargain basement risk solution to satisfy some regulatory requirement. The only significant win for Razor in the last couple of years is RBC, which is pretty impressive, and about the only one where they give a $ value. An indication of IT&e's intrinsic value could be got if you knew the value of the support contracts from the various sites/products. It's still difficult, because the contracts are generally small and scattered all over the world and hence difficult to service because you need people on the ground and these solutions tend to be customised for each client. Plus they seem top heavy, they seem to have some baggage from the other products (Monarque doesn't seem to be going anywhere) and aquisitions, and the company never seem to turn an operating profit. Hence it's hard to know whether they're intrinsicly undervalued or not.