RE:RE:RE:RE:Reached out to IR...I guess there never was a 90 day windowOk, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here since you seem reasonable enough. Seems only you and blizzard are unaware the 90 day window is not in Intermap's contract. It's a stipulation that was found in the card summary of the contract between Airmap and the DRC. Todd was doing his best to address the concern on the cc. Obviously Intermap became aware the contract summary was in the public sphere and were prepared to discuss what they could about it without actually medelling in their counterparty's business. Airmap is private, which has been mentioned multiple times. So they don't have the public markets to address and be communicative with. In saying that, the existence of the 90 day window was substantiated by Todd on the cc. And, as it clearly became worrisome for shareholders, he was given no option but to address it and reiterate the official guidance that the Airmap mgmt communicated to them. Todd said something to the effect of, "obviously we haven't seen the contract between our project manager and the government". Again, as far as I have seen or was made aware, only the card summary was uploaded. Intermap's contract is the size of three large encyclopedias (one for each language), so I'm inclined to believe the contract between Airmap and the government is also quite large. As such, I personally never saw anything more than a few pages uploaded onto the government's website of each item (loi, loa, recruitment of contractor, definitive agreement etc etc). I believe if you search far back enough on SH you'll find where it was heavily discussed. With respect to Cory's response. He is plainly saying there is no 90 day clause with Intermap. That, I thought, was common knowledge by now. And, he specifically mentioned that noone should 100% trust the requisites are on the internet. That, to me, either meant he had personally never seen the uploaded documents that were found (and I believe removed - the one with the 90 day clause although I'm sure someone here saved a copy), OR, that he was stating there were requisites to the actual 90 day clause, which would not be included in the card summary of the contract. Therefore, the q2 guidance has realistically always taken precedence over that stipulation. But, the retail market of imp shareholders focused on the 90 day rule, believing they were being intentionally mislead by imp management, when in reality, it was the paranoia around here that has poisoned those who don't have patience and are uncomfortable with the risks of the investment. Goes to show however, fact check everything. Apply independent logic and only partake in group think with those who you can trust in that moment. As always, mgmt of Intermap are staying consistent, transparent (as transparent as the ethics allow), and responsible to their shareholders and clients. Nobody is in a tougher place than they. Only a few of us have given them the respect they truly deserve, by giving them the benefit of the doubt and not promoting the paranoid, dot connecting, libelous and fear mongering stories. We are considered the ones with the agenda, the bulls who see everything with rose coloured glasses. The difference is, we are not bulls nor bears, we are astute investors who know where there is money to be made. Now, those who think "the bulls" wear rose coloured glasses because we can't spot the red flags should take a long hard look in the mirror because they're so full of $hit their eyes are brown. And with that said, I believe you're genuine and long so I figure it would be good to help you keep the facts straight.
Moderndaymarval wrote: Yes I am seriously and it was in an email. I'll forward it to you if you'd like? I am wicked bullish on this company, I always have been, but I have certainly questioned their communication skills and I am also a realist. City's response means 1 of 2 things: 1. Todd not refuting the 90 window when it was mentioned in 2 different earnings calls months apart means he was intentionally trying to mislead investors. 2. Cory is not informed and was out of them with that response. I'd like to believe #2 for obvious reasons but they either did or didn't have a 90 day window. It's not a subjective up for interpretation thing. And not dispelling the "rumors" the 2 occasions he had makes me believe that Cory is just flat out wrong.