Ann: Change in substantial holding from MUFG, page-12

@Transversal

It's possible that the sales increase last quarter was from incremental new sales for their networked product from smaller retailers that did not merit separate announcements. If so, I feel management should have mentioned this in the quarterly update. Otherwise I'm just going to assume the sales increase was due to seasonal or lumpy sales from their other businesses (e.g. shopper exchange). That's is not a bad thing, but from what I understand, these sales do not carry any obligations for the retailer customer to share their data with other retailers, and thus does not contribute to growing the network or the long term vision. I'm also uncertain as to the economics of the unnetworked products, and whether they can be counted upon to provide sustainable sales growth.

Basically, I've assumed, no new announced retailer partnership agreements = no traction in stated vision. 

Fair enough that you choose to take the glassdoor reviews with a grain of salt. You certainly have to keep some skepticism when dealing with anonymous posts on the internet. I personally find the posts fairly credible, especially given the sparse progress made by the company since listing. 

Is it possible that management continues to push forward with their tech vision and spend the entire ~$200M cash balance doing this, regardless of whether they encounter insurmountable roadblocks (e.g. perhaps no retailer beyond Nordstrom is interested in sharing their customer data with other competing retailers) or other harsh realities (e.g. they are too far behind the market leaders in digital receipts, or the entire interactive digital receipts concept isn't viable in the first place because no one actually 'interacts' with their receipts). Sure. But the board is full of top tier bankers and lawyers. They're no dummies. I'm betting that they can recognise dud concepts when they see it, and will take seriously their duty to maximise shareholders' wealth.