PNV - Banter and General Comments, page-10509

We know how they're performing, they're delivering very well on their promises to generate strong revenue growth. Management of PNV are delivering incredibly strongly relative to most companies, as measured by what they can control. It is obvious to anyone with even a pinch of business knowledge that they are in control of their bottom lines and will be very profitable when the deem it necessary to be profitable. At the moment, they have a big pile of cash so it is not necessary to be profitable.

You clearly have zero knowledge mate, don't make it sound like it's merely a different opinion. You are objectively incorrect. You are clueless, thinking all businesses MUST be the same and must be profitable. Every business is unique, and in the case of PNV, short term losses to generate high growth before being profitable in the longer run is a very good strategy.



I asked you before but you never answered. They have a large pile of cash, there are three things they can do with this. 1) They can let it sit on a bank account and decay due to inflation. 2) They can distribute it to shareholders (eg dividends). 3) they can invest it into pursuing growth.

Obviously option 1 is a terrible choice. Option 2 is also not what investors want. Option 3 is a very logical capital allocation. They have the cash, they don't need to raise more as a result of being loss making. They are investing this cash into growth. When they are running low on cash, that's when they'll switch modes and become profitable. Until then, spending approx $4-5m more than they generate in revenue is a very good allocation of cash.

But you seem to think your opinions are so great. What do you think they should be doing with this cash instead? Obviously you don't think they should be investing it into pursuing growth, so what should they do???