You're making a lot of assumptions about me, my age and...

You're making a lot of assumptions about me, my age and knowledge and you're not actually discussing the points I am bringing up.

Your second point above concedes that there is some negativity in the numbers, so i'm not all together wrong and as a rank amateur, this gives me something to be proud of.

As someone with your experience you would know that raising funds through an IPO is the most expensive way to raise funds in terms of cost and information leakage. But the company gets to make this choice and by coming to market and raising the amount of funds they raised, they have set the hurdle themselves. If they cannot show growth that justifies this high valuation then it is a problem for current shareholders and the share price. Were 3PL poorly advised or too greedy when seeking this much money in the IPO?

If you think about the pro-forma results as an equation, you're saying that it makes sense to ignore expenses on one side of the equation without making some adjustment to revenue, which has presumably grown as a result of the new capital on the other side of the equation. This doesn't make rational economic sense even if it is a one off.

In relation to bringing up receivables growing at a faster rate than revenue. This is basic analysis and generally considered a red flag. Why is this happening? Are they bringing forward sales to increase the current period sales? Are they booking sales that aren't really sales? With regards to the size of the absolute numbers, this may be true now but if this becomes a trend and continues at the current rate of change then it will quickly become a massive issue. With respects to what you have said regarding the increase in receivables being a single customer, I'm fairly confident that the annual report says that no single customer represents more than 10% of revenue so that probably doesn't explain it. It is definitely something that needs to be checked with CFO as you mention.

As for Klutch's comment about auditors signing off on the bad debts. Come on mate, your faith in auditors is completely and utterly misguided. There are literally hundreds of cases where auditors have missed things like this. The amount being written off is one thing, but more importantly is how does this affect cash flow. You sell a product and don't receive payment for 12 months. That seems like a terrible model to me.

As I have said before, this is a good product with a good cause but at this valuation it is grossly overvalued. There is so many sh*tty aspects in the Annual Report that it is hard to know where to start.