This isn't (yet) an earnings story but a revenue growth story, so the 2019 revenue guidance is the most important thing we will be looking for, as it will give an indication which scenario is the most realistic:

• The moderate scenario ($100M-$110M) by analysts.
• The company's scenario ($144M) from the iPass acquisition presentation.
• The bull case ($150+) from backlog conversion calculations.

You can see some details about the first two of these scenarios here and on the bull case here.

And above, you can vote in our little poll!

Join our forum here.

Yes, there is something to be said for that, Mrebs. However, there is also something to be said for the bull case:

• Faster backlog conversion, this might be possible with the help of the batch of engineers that came from the two acquisitions.
• Selling more to existing customers. In Q3, the company basked in a dollar net retention rate of 147%, that is, for every dollar stipulated in the initial contract, customers on average contract 47 cents more, but these additional sales show up in increases in backlog.
• Backlog has increased by 40% since the company made that iPass acquisition presentation which contained that $144M 2019 revenue guidance. Backlog was $500M then, it's almost $700M at the end of February.
• A new enterprise sales segment mentioned by the chairman and perhaps buttressed by several corporate customer wins in February.

I'm a little afraid optimism is getting a bit frothy. Why would the analyst be off by this huge margin, basically all of them?

'mikekato2002' pid='82923' datel Wrote:I'll go with what the company says until they say something different. Hopefully they'll revise upward but if they are +/- close to their own projections,the stock will do more than fine.

Hi Mike, yes that's also my baseline approach, basically although I'm not entirely unsensitive to arguments from both the moderate sites, pointing out that analyst predict much lower figures, nor from the bull side who could argue that backog is 40% higher since the company made that guidance.

Analysts were off on VCEL projections by a good bit when I was in it. They analyze a lot of stocks so they can’t spend the time on research like we can. Every ER there I was very close to their revs and EPS, while they were not near as close.

'Mrebs' pid='82925' datel Wrote:

Analysts were off on VCEL projections by a good bit when I was in it. They analyze a lot of stocks so they can’t spend the time on research like we can. Every ER there I was very close to their revs and EPS, while they were not near as close.

All true Mrebs, but the question that lingers in my mind is why the analyst guidance is so much lower as they must have been aware of the company guidance in that iPass acquisition presentation. In any case, we'll soon find out..

'Mrebs' pid='82928' datel Wrote:144M is the projected 2019 revs released by TEUM, and it was released the first week of December I believe... So they have added at least 118M to backlog during the months of Dec,Jan, and Feb, they also added 76M in Nov. Lets play it safe and not include Nov contracts. 118M x.15% (first year conversion %) = 17M + 144M = 161M - 6M (play it safe) for late IPAS close = 155M minimum for their update this Tuesday IMO. If they did not add Nov contracts to that 144M estimate then we could see them bump 2019 guidance as high as 166.5M, this # is still sand bagging b/c that does not include any contracts for the rest of 2019! We are way undervalued still there is no doubt there. I don't think many people know they came out with 144M projected revs in 2019 back in Dec.

A few datapoints:

• The iPass acquisition presentation came out on November 13.
• Pareteum's website do no longer seem to have that presentation (the above link is from Seeking Alpha).
• November's addition to backlog was very large: $76M and this came out on November 29.

Ergo, that presentation doesn't include November's figures. It's somewhat odd that analysts would not be familiar with that presentation, and it's also odd that it doesn't appear to be on the website anymore (or maybe I just can't find it).

I do appreciate the work you've done Mrebs, more specifically the spreadsheet. Where I do think you might be a little overoptimistic is something I mentioned before, the 90-180 day gap between signing a contract and first revenue generation from that contract.

This isn't a big setback, at worst, everything gets delayed by half a year..