re Peter's DGT-interview as much as I value the interview, I have some second thoughts:
--Hyperion-testing ca March/2012 DGT stated that they will publish test-results if the testers agree to the publication (and implicitly: DGT considers them fit to be published) So what we know for sure is, that DGT published NOTHING up to now. This could have TWO (or more) possible reasons: a) the testing was (very) successful, so ALL the testers decided that they should NOT be published, to have an advantage. This btw would NOT in the interest of DGT, because this would rise their market-value, considering their commercial model. b) the testing was NOT successful, and DGT decided to NOT publish the results because of that. The testers did not care, because riding a dead horse is always embarrassing. Now consider case (a), which seemingly -more or less- is the case as to DGT, wrt the test-results. The testers would keep their mouth shut, and keep the earth-shattering results for themselves. But this was obviously not the case. The outcome then leaked to 1000 companies in 79 countries! ( btw, the UN has 179 member states, some of them quite small --look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_United_Nations#Current_members ) Anyway. So there must be a big leak, which could only be DGT itself, which relayed the information to those interested companies under some request of nondisclosure. Actually it was so successful, that a lot of them decided to sign a contract or a letter of intent, because of that, and invested 40mio$ per contract. So I would expect one or two contracts and lots of letters of intent, with some serious conditionals from the customer side. Case (b) would be trivial in comparison. So I ask the vortex-tribe: Where is my error in reasoning? Normally I would not bother, but this is quite important Guenter
