I think that the relationship between the boards precluded that...

I think that the relationship between the boards precluded that ever happening. I'm not sure there was enough good-will to form that sort of relationship, and really NEA was not in a position where they could deal with it financially and continue their US expansion. That really is the crux of the matter for NEA, getting a strong momentum in the USA and making inroads into the market. There is always a certain window of opportunity in these things, and they would not want to miss it.

I think that the drone scenario may not be as damaging to NEA as is presented, there are so many restrictions on what can be done with a drone compared to a full aircraft. NEA can fly at 20,000ft(?) with their new tech, collecting a lot of data in one hit ... they can carry a far bigger payload than will be possible for a drone in the near future (at least) .... they can fly for longer periods and further distances than drones will be licensed to fly for a long time - if ever. IN the long run, to cover huge areas I don't think that the ultimate cost of using drones will be a lot different to light aircraft, especially if NEA start using point data in their acquisitions - which a drone would not be able to do.

@Emtee - I agree with the (over)pricing comment - I am thinking (hoping?) that NEA is different to Aconex in their expansion. The problem with Aconex was that it is difficult to drag large companies away from their current software - there are a lot of people using it, and to change platform costs an entire project a huge amount of time until the product becomes common-place. Aconex had reached that stage in Australia, but had a huge amount of work in the US to get real acceptance (although they were getting there). That involved huge sales and support costs, which killed their margins and enabled the predator to force the price down and ultimately swallow them.

I don't see Nearmap as having the same issues; all the current aerial imagery offerings are just that at the moment, and so switching platforms is no real issue. This is where NEA is starting to win the war, because they have a much more comprehensive tools package than the others ... so they can easily win customers, but once there people will be reluctant to move away.

If they keep treating their customers right, keep developing and staying in front of the pack and start to rationalise their powerbase, they should not fall into the same trap as Aconex - or Spookfish.