I wouldn't classify my comments as "optimism". I've countered many of your pro-StatSport argument with simple facts but you always seem to revert back on your fixation on how StatSport has won a small number of elite teams and how your supposed meeting with the StatSports co-founder went very well and you saw their financials etc (which I am still skeptical even happened).
I think with StatSports you are ignoring the obvious and trying to highlight it as a major issue for CAT, when in fact the opposite is true.
For example - StatSports win rate is actually really poor:
StatSports actually only has 417 clients listed at the moment. Also, they only won 50 clients in the last 12 months. Where, Catapult went from 1800 to 2100 in 6 month between their FY18 and 1H19 reporting cycle. So, CAT picked up 300 teams (~75% of StatSports current client base) in only 6 months. This means CAT, has on average, won 50 clients per month where it took StatSports one whole year to get that many! So why aren't you winning clients is maybe a question for StatSports and not CAT - don't you think?
This strongly correlates and checks out with CAT's claims their win-rate is 80-90%. Not to mention also, StatSport does undertake in significant double counting. i.e. there are 20 separate England FC teams (i.e. almost 10%) listed in Europe client category. It includes all academies, womens, disabled, deaf teams etc. They called Man Utd a client - but turns out they never used StatSport.... They called US Soccer Fed a $1b deal, but turns out this was primarily 6,500 free units to academies...
In terms of superior product - that is easy. EPL teams running on CAT record lower injury rates is one example. Vector has an integrated HR where APEX doesn't and many athletes complain about wearing the Polar HR straps. CAT has a wider range of product and add on services such as video etc.
CAT Price at posting:
76.5¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)
