Snake, MM has provided numbers. So $12m @ 20% net = $2.4m. $2.4m over how many years to roll out 300 lockers? Hardly enough for TZ to generate a fanfare over especially considering the potential contract was between 2 third parties.
Anyway, you want facts. Perhaps though you should really be demanding facts from the company. How many 'facts' has John Wilson provided shareholders over the phone or in shareholder updates? That goes for the directors also. No offence but you and Bernie (among others) are new to THIS company's manoeuvrings. I cannot blame you two though, as you'd have to go through the same process as many of the major shareholders who post on here have, to fully 'appreciate' the 'efforts' of the company to deliver shareholder value. This takes time. You fellas are just coming out of your honeymoon phase while many of us are at the divorce and fight for custody phase.
Okay, I'll provide you some information about what I found out recently. You can take them as facts like you do with what JW provides. Or you can take them as fiction like what JW provides.
By writing the following, I'm sure I risk jeopardizing a relationship, but so be it. A contact of mine who is in the retail industry has been in preliminary discussions with Pitney Bowes about the parcel lockers, and most recently spoke with them post AP debacle.
I cannot relay where this company is considering to place lockers or how many. Just assume that it is minimal. Part of the enquiry obviously related to the actual technology as a concern is whether the technology is viable, widespread and the supplier of the technology would still be around for the life of supplied lockers. I'm guessing that the concern is akin to having betamax when everybody had VHS.
The response from PB which was relayed to me was (to paraphrase) - "installations have been taking place in conjunction with a small technology company in the US at Cisco, Microsoft and McDonalds including multiple repeat orders. The supplier of the technology is viable company with whom we have agreements in place covering the US and Europe. This company will not go broke (in response to the recent media coverage about Pitney Bowes and Australia Post), as they have also just received to major orders for another of their business units".
Now, we've all heard about Cisco and Microsoft. Therefore, I am assuming that McDonalds is real also. Ok, McDonalds may not be large. However, are we really expected to believe that McDonalds does not want Burger King to know that they are using parcel lockers for corporate mail????? Same applies to Cisco and Microsoft.
I also wasn't aware of any US and European agreements with Pitney Bowes (nothing released to the market...again), but perhaps this explains why we are not seeing any meaningful revenue ie PB is really squeezing us over there.
As for the two recent major orders for another business unit, I assume that they relate to IXP (unless Intanova and Aerospace have been resurrected from the grave). I have not relayed this info to anybody and certainly have never had any communication with MM EVER except on HC. Now when MM wrote that he had heard that a major IXP deal had just been signed and not released, obviously it has put an extra bee in my bonnet and lends credence to what PB has been telling at least one potential customer.
The impression that my contact received from PB (post AP) is that they are very keen on supplying lockers. However, this may all have been a pitch, with wranglings going on at the highest level.
Hope this answers your question Snake. Maybe not facts. But no less reliable than anything else that has come from Level 11, 1 Chifley Square.
MM, my response to your question is above. Also, like you, I've had my fair share attempted shareholder soothing over the years. I want FACTS and NOW. The REAL facts. And ALL of the facts. I can see why there is substance to the threats of class action. Many of major legal firms that take on CA cases eg S&G, MB etc take on cases based on company disclosure failings. Nufarm and ABC spring to mind. Who knows what else would be uncovered should all of the major shareholders join together. Do those convertible notes wreak a 'little' bit also? Is anybody providing a comprehensive chronological dossier on TZ?
Now a question for you MM. You used to claim that there were no deals. Now you appear to agreeing with my opinion that this company needn't be portrayed as a basket case, and there is much progress that is required to be but not being shown. Why? Is it the unreported deals that you've been hearing about and witnessing?
TZL Price at posting:
12.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)