That assumes that all costs are accurately recorded as being...

That assumes that all costs are accurately recorded as being allocated to the direct business.

The cynic in me says that a number of costs are not able to be split meaningfully between the business lines and putting them against the direct business for comparison purposes could well understate the cost position of the ongoing indirect business.

It is true that the indirect and enablement business does appear to be more profit generative but it remains to be seen whether the removal of the revenue from the direct business has a 1:1 cost impact on the indirect business.

None of this should distract from the fact that under current management there has been significant value destruction undertaken. I did the sums for an argument the other day:

IAB acquired Anittel (AYG) "net" of debt, that is to say they paid $10M for AYG AND assumed the leases for HCS at around $4.6M - December 2014. (link: http://www.inaboxgroup.com.au/announcements/2014/ASXrelease-Inabox-to-acquire-Anittel.pdf)

Subsequently to that purchase, IAB sold the HCS business to Telstra for around $4.5M, less than they assumed the lease liabilities of in 2014 - June 2016 (18 months later)

IAB then procured Hostworks for $7M in cash (two tranches) - February 2017

IAB then sells the Hostworks and Anittel business for $2M - August 2018 (18 months later)

From a scoresheet perspective:

Anittel: -$10M

Telstra Sale: +$1M (I'll be generous and assume they made that much, I think it's breakeven at best)

Hostworks -$7M

5G Sale: +$2M

Total loss in <4 years: $14M

This does NOT include restructuring costs, acquisition and divestment transaction costs (which would be significant) and opportunity cost attached to these purchases.