Comparisons with Google's imagery are fair but mostly relevant...

Comparisons with Google's imagery are fair but mostly relevant only to the small targets (single seats, small companies). Many of the high-value targets of Nearmaps are not using GE imagery and instead have purpose flown or shared access to much more recently acquired data than Google, I assume the situation is similar in US as to Australia.

Think Landgate in Western Australia who fly the entire Perth metro area every 6 months and make it available at near zero cost to govt. departments and fair rates to commercial purchasers. Justification for more frequent and quicker turnaround obviously exists as there are a number of large WA-based Nearmap subscribers, however lower accuracy is a negative of Nearmap that must be weighed up. It is worth noting that Landgate's 6 month program used to be 12 months, possibly due to request and competition with Nearmap's arrival.

The developers and mine-sites generally contract high accuracy commercial capture (by the Fugro's, AAM, etc) ad hoc and don't necessarily have the frequency requirement or wish to access (and pay for) the remainder of the state that is of no interest.