Where is Fair Value?, page-7

I'm more than comfortable with the land grab approach as long the costs of acquisition are reasonable, my issue is that the seeming change in strategy has not been communicated or demonstrated in actual results yet.

As a result how do I assess what's important to the company and how well they are performing. If they are going for the land grab then they are doing a pretty poor job of it as 30% growth is not "land grab" type growth when you have <$5m in revenue in a market they state is worth multiple $bn.

Alternatively if a mid point between growth / cashflow is the goal then so be it but be clear about it.

The lack of communication makes it hard to know.

I am also dubious of the "1ST has steered away from guidance and bullish forward commentary because of an understanding that moving forward, the best approach is to underpromise and overdeliver" argument. Its smacks of lack of confidence or desire to communicate with shareholders.