You are factually incorrect in the following1. The company is...

You are factually incorrect in the following

1. The company is clearly selling products and services based on last 2 quarterly announcements see 4C announcements. If you bother to read financial reports to the market from companies that operate in similar market(s) you will find that all companies report BOTH services and product sales - companies have to be able to offer prospective clients a range of services and a range of continuing services to go along with hardware and software implementation in these markets. Typically - service and maintenance aspects of the business equate to 50% of revenue - see CISCO/Juniper/Cytrix etc latest financial statements for verification.
2. There are orders of magnitude more than 20 competing companies in the global business of moving, storing, and managing data - competition is very strong across all segments and will only get stronger
3. There is no such entity as the AUX- perhaps you are thinking ASX - the ASX has no regulatory power to force companies to release IP valuation reports - such release would be meaningless in a commercial context anyway., since IP is constantly changing and developing - ( see R&D spend) in Company releases.
4. You can refer to any number of services that provide a list of major shareholders/entities and see for yourself who has been selling what and when and for how much.
5. You seem to be under the misapprehension that the company is in the primary business of what you call cybersecurity - I have seen no reference in publicly available information which suggests that this is the primary focus of the company. - therefore references to so-called Australian Cyber Security policy is irrelevant. Network traffic security is ( as you should know since you post about same) a well defined and well understood set of standards ( themselves constantly evolving and improving) that ALL companies wishing to offer services and product solution to the general market for data Management | Movement have to meet client-driven levels of expectations based on their specific use cases.

For the avoidance of any doubt - the past use of the phrase virtual invisible network was a nice marketing summary for some inherant characteritcs of the P2P tech the company was developing at the time. However, and as the company declared almost a year ago - NOT a major driver of future growth NOR focus of product development.

The VIN product which you may be referring to is clearly secondary to a more sophisticated and capable scalable set of products that the company started going to market with this calendar year.

Perhaps you might be interested in this post:: 46288642 in another thread for some background as to how developing technology stocks are priced.

As an investor I have little interest in the company achieving what you call accounting profitability in the near term - it is and will continue to be irrelevant to how the stock is priced by sophisticated investors - again see above link. I AM interested in seeing whether the Company remains on track to deliver its forecast revenue numbers for the calendar year and I have already calculated what a realistic free cash generation capability would look like given the company's own forecasts to market and reasonable assumptions about use of cash. What matters in pricing companies like this is the outlook for revenue growth and cashflow generation and the ROIC numbers that follow.

In this context - the September quarter results and AGM which follows will be much more revealing than the look back year end accounting numbers that will be posted.

Good luck and good health in these troubled times.