RE:RE:RE:Here's howIntermap was required to disclosed award as it had secured the contract through a competitive process (which involved other parties). This type of information could have been leaked (and is material). As such, it was press released as it should have.
While the second contract has been discussed (as it is material), it has not been press released, and will likely not until it is final -- the reason being that the process is different. But again, information of a potential second contract should be disclosed as it IS material. These contracts are huge in comparison to the market capitalization of the company.
Your comments on the company bleeding money are based on historical financials. Intermap closed (and completed) a >$3 million contract and likely secured a number of smaller insitepro contracts in the quarter. I would wager Q3 will actually be profitable.
Why do you think the company would maliciously advertise potential contracts anyway? It wouldn't even be possible for the company to raise equity (and management owns a small stake). Not sure why you would even compare MDA and IMP?! You're stretching a little here.
Xandar, you certainly know a lot about the space, but there are nuances relating to Intermap that you have NOT adjusted/accounted to/for. Give the management a call...