RE:RE:From IRPatty - imo, call me ignorant, but I believe we are just seeing some much needed housekeeping formalities that are being suggested/implemented by the new board members.
We already are aware that Intermap has adopted a much more conservative tone since Blott joined. This is best exemplified with the ending of the Q1/16 conference call where Todd says:
"Well, thank you everybody, especially thank you for the questions. This helps us. Make sure that we can try to address them upfront in our comments. So, I encourage you to keep asking these types of questions. I appreciate all of your patience with the organization as it is frustrating waiting for these to kickoff. These SDIs are rather large magnitude and we intend to make something of them here during 2016. Again, thank you and have yourself a great day."
And then obviously during the next CC for Q2/16, I think we all noticed Todd was not able to provide any answer outside the generic, and with a much more 'ticked off' tone to his voice. This call was shortly after Blott had arrived and for anyone whose done a little digging, it appears this was the beginning of the new 'conservative' tone and presentation as per Blott's request. I believe Todd wants to answer the questions and continue what we had going from Q1 but is now not able to as the board has pushed for this.
We also haven't had any PRs really since that CC other than the $1.6 million extension and the news of Lutdke resigning. I believe the intention was to solidify the board for good and then restructure, and then formally set the guidance/royalty procedures to set the final tone on hoe things would go on going forward - on Blott's first day as Exec chairman no less.
Intermap has stated publicly that they would no longer provide guidance on any ongoing negotiations, multiple times this past year. But where was it ever formally written? And despite them publicly stating this on conference calls, they still tried to as best update us on these projects. But as far as I know it was never written. I believe this was just an administrative suggestion from the board.
And to further stand by this - the royalty statement in the recent PR was also heavily just a formality. This is yet another request from the board, imo. Royalty payments already weren't being made and only being accrued since the inception of said royalty. Why make a release stating payments would be suspended until x date if they already weren't collecting and allowing to be accrued? Well, simple answer is just another newly imposed admin suggestion from Blott. Communicate true intentions formally.
So we have three things now:
1) Conservativism on all ongoing operations (not only a cover your a55 type statement, but better at tempering expectations). This portion relates to updates from the current project.
2) No further guidance (Simply written in stone for the same reason as above)
3) Formal communication on royalty plan - formally stating the obvious.
Finally, Cory is correct to say that the guidance policy was already in effect - it had just never been set in stone (written formally) and communicated to all shareholders in the most direct way as per this type of release. Updates will be conservative, guidance will be nil and all 'intentions' will be communicated as they sit. That's the new intermap since Blott has come aboard. We may not like it but it is the way this should be handled.