Price target 20 cents, page-3

Hi Gucci. That's all very well, but NET has all too frequently touted exciting new distribution arrangements, new revenue streams, new partners for all sorts of ventures, all of which have come to nothing. NET now has a credibility problem. This is exacerbated by endless capital raises and dilutions, all of which give the impression of a company struggling to keep afloat and forced into some pretty crappy cap raises such as Everblu. Here we are, 7 years on, and still not a cent in profit and $100m in accumulated losses. The demand for NET's products is far from certain, let alone proven. The absence of any communication and details on its sources of revenue/costs doesn't help.
When it comes to valuing a new (-ish) business, you need a clear and realistic glide path to profitability, not just revenue, and some $$ substance to its potential sales and target markets. These have all been missing which makes you wonder if they exist at all. Another difficulty in valuing tech companies is lack of direct comparability with peers, limited track record, differences in access to funding, and cashflow. The attrition rate in tech is very high, so you have to take that into consideration as well. On this basis, any valuation of NET is relying on assumptions and guesses and blue-sky hopes. I'd like to see @Petey's calculation on how he comes up with NET being 3-4x undervalued. Mr Market doesn't seem to agree with him. Words and glossy presentations on the size of the global market, the size of other players, the size of $$ pouring into tech are all irrelevant until NET can generate a profit.Sorry to rain on your parade, but we have to keep this real.