yup, there is no question that segment reporting fails to indicate magical souren smithing ... which might not feel good. the feel good stuff is in this, from PR for the annual report:
In March, a European governmental agency selected EMBASSY Remote Administration Server (ERAS) software for the management of PC-based Trusted Platform Modules (TPM). An initial order was executed for approximately 6,000 seat licenses plus professional services support.
This is not the recent NHS thingy, the NHS thingy was Safend, this as reported is not Safend.
To me, 6k seats as indicated is $300k ... roughly speaking. This showed up and weighs in (speculatively) like PwC did. PwC began and ended there. So too may this. But that is the beginning and end of feel good for me. THe NHS thingy, particularly noting that it is SFND products, which seriously, they get something like $10 a seat for with COS likely through the roof ... well, the available ratio of whine and moan to feel good is less than whole hog bullish.
Nevertheless, the SFND deal with the NHS is announced, a 1000 seats at 10 bucks a seat is my guess. The other thingy, 6000 seats is more likely in the 50 a seat, for about 300k. It seems one can feel fgood about notions for chips and bits going forwards on both of these (but seriously, I think SFND sales are not profitable, something about them smacks of lots of customization for 10 bucks a seat in the end ... as SKS put it, selling a "commodity". Commodity sales enjoy razor thin margins. Not feel good stuff.
So who cares if it is 1m seats of NHS on razor thin commodity sales? They may well be making a buck a seat net, or worse.
I think it is important to discriminate between massive COS low rent commodities and high return flagship products, and the discrimination appears blurred to me on this one.
The ERAS thingy in the 10k PR is feel good, the SFND NHS thingy is barely break-even busy work as currently reported.
The above content is my opinion.
AI
