As I mentioned a couple of days ago, in order for the bashers to provide a convincing argument supporting their non-investment thesis, they would have to demonstrate that the Cognizant partnership was not meaningful. In other words, the bashers would have to show that Cognizant did not do any significant due diligence before partnering with Reliq and/or that Cognizant was nothing other than a simple service provider to Reliq. Cognizant's own actions and statements are sufficient to counter that argument.
Now, not only would the bashers have to show Cognizant's partnership with Reliq is unimportant, but they would also have to show that the quality of Reliq's product and/or service is deficient. In fact, the bulk of the evidence points in the other direction. Certainly the first smaller contract signed wouldn't have relied on any referrals, but since then those referrals would have been readily available. My own admittedly imperfect count of contracts executed since the corporate reset totals 378. That's a huge number, which allows for generous due diligence, fact checking and references. If a significant number of those multitudinous clients thought that Reliq's offering was junk, they would be understandably upset, given the time and effort it takes to integrate a new system into their operations and the reputational damage that would have resulted with their own clients, which are of course their patients. Reliq's clients would have changed their own service model for nothing, the resultant frustration would show all over the internet and the bashers would have a field day. That just isn't the case. Furthermore, contract signings continue unabated which means the cumulative due diligence is massive. And, as we know from last year's audit, clients who weren't current in payments owed to Reliq agreed they indeed owed those monies. They wouldn't have done that if the software didn't work or Reliq was improperly providing service.
Moving up the food chain, Reliq has been signing larger deals of late. Those newer customers - clients representing >254 skilled nursing facilities, plus a leading US healthcare company, plus a large physician network - are capable of and would have done much more due diligence, fact checking and referrals. I'm sure bashers like to dismiss this kind of evidenced based growth as a mere trifle, but the facts indicate otherwise.
So, we have scores of smaller contracts, a real partnership with Cognizant and a progression to much larger deals. This isn't the stuff scams are made of. In reality, it's the stuff successful companies are made of.
I might get around to discussing Reliq's deficiencies at some point, but I'm still in debunking mode.