I don't know how you've interpreted my post but let me clarify....

I don't know how you've interpreted my post but let me clarify.

What I'm saying relates to the post I quoted which discussed clients choosing not to sign binding agreements (as they don't want to be identified by name) and instead opting to just engage with IAM on a non-binding, per-usage basis.

I'm saying that if this is the case, then management should provide the public with a regular guidance or forecast of throughput. This holds them accountable for performance, as it provides shareholders with some transparency to observe changes in demand, and with a better metric than simply just financials to judge if the company has performed above or below expectations.

A comparable situation would be the expectation of a medical device company to provide annual and quarterly updates on unit sales forecasts, as well as previous quarter actuals vs. forecasts.