You may be right about some of your assertions, I don't know for sure. The litmus test to conclude they are facts and not simply opinion is however another matter. The former requires unemotional effort of evidence collection that is tested in a court room (gold standard) and the latter requires, well the opposite but mostly emotive susceptibility to narratives.
So I'd be interested in how you formed the following assertions using the gold standard.
- Lack of integrity.
- Why is wouldn't dare return to Australia and gone for good.
With respect to a couple of other issues.
- EU 1.3M profit for any emerging Fintech company is a solid result and in particular one with its recent history. Stack rank all the Australian Fintech company's and you'll quickly conclude its slim pickings. In other words they are a standout performer given the circumstances.
- What if William Hill find a better deal? Obviously competitive business includes risk, but is also includes opportunity. William Hill is EXPANDING its services scope, so its unlikely to be going some other place soon. They landed one of the larger clients, so clearly the strategy can migrate to others.
- The market cap before suspension was clearly based on its potential and early profitability. We all know something opaque got in the way, but now those shackles have been removed.
- Given the early profitability and obvious potential the company still has, why would he do anything to jeopardize its future from which he'd be an obvious significant beneficiary. In particular how acting detrimentally would be beneficial given the actual (not perceived) reputational damage that would cause him longer term.
Volumes are always the leading indicators for fintech and the curve trajectory and despite the significant local troubles, is positive. The board and management have done a remarkable job to extricate themselves from the domestic quagmire and still put in a profit for 2021 (albeit unaudited).
JK is squarely focused on EU and further abroad and the board will manage the local issue, which incidentally have not lost confidence in JK or the commercial opportunity. If there was the sort skullduggery some assert, its highly likely it would fracture the team - none. After all, people have careers and reputations to maintain.
Thinking about the company's focus and prospects 6 months ago vs now, you'd have to be overly cynical that we are in a worse position. That said, the next few quarters will be the test of momentum, reputation repair and long term sustainability.
