Honestly, that one doesn't bug me as much. 2 weeks is a while, but as you say, already suspended, so only off-market transfers would've been affected. In the grand scheme of wrongs, it's not a huge concern for me. Some of the reasoning took me by surprise, but it isn't high on my priority list.
The recurring revenue part (just going back to you post immediately preceding to prevent multi-posting). The reason recurring is a big factor is that if the recurring revenue signified growth. The non-recurring revenue part was not growth.
If we have new clients generating $2m of revenue in a quarter, that's big growth. That shows that the rate at which we're onboarding clients is rapid, and that our sales strategies are working, and that we're getting market shares. If it's $2m/qtr, great, but it also might be $2m this quarter, $4m next quarter, $10m the quarter after. It's a real boon for the company. To the value of the business and therefore share price, that could be hundreds of millions of dollars. I'll give performance shares for that, absolutely.
If it's $2m in one-off project work that onboards new clients, but the new clients might be $200k/qtr, well... that's not as good. That might add a bit to the value of the business, but maybe more like $20m than $200m. Still good, but not awesome awesome.
If it's $2m in one-off project work, and that makes you a $1m profit, but won't generate any future revenue, well, that's worth $1m to the value of the business. It's a one-off profit.
If it's $2m in one-off project work that generates no profit because you literally outsourced all of the work, and results in no future revenue, that's worth nothing to the business. That's just being an intermediary for no gain.
If it's $2m in one-off project work that generates no profit, and no future revenue, but gives 300million shares to the directors... That screws your shareholders royally. Same assets, but 50% more shares on issue... You just reduced the value of their shares by a third.
Expand
