Okay, everybody. I'd like to introduce our next presentation here at the Planet Microcap Showcase, Toronto in partnership with Microcap Club. Joining us to give a rousing presentation is Neil Sweeney from Reklaim.
Okay, here we go. 20, 25 minutes to go over six years of this company. Hopefully there's some people in here who have some familiarity with Reklaim. This would be a bit of an update, lots of new things to keep an eye on if you're familiar with the company. If you're new to the story, no problem. It's a relatively easy concept to understand. I'm Neil Sweeney. I'm the founder of the company. This company is six years old, launched out of actually my last company, another company that was also public in nature. Let's get down to the obvious things. This is an investment conference, so why should you invest in Reklaim? I'm biased on these things, but there's a few things to obviously take a look at. First of all, we're a profitable company. Two years of profitability. We have strong growth.
We typically grow 25%- 50% a year. We grew 73% in Q1 this year, 18% in Q2. We operate at very high margins, 80% gross margin. We generate positive free cash flow. We have no debt. I own 40% of the actual stock, which should make you comfortable as an investor that I'm not going to be flippant around my decisions around how we raise money, how we deal with the balance sheet, etc. We have multiple revenue streams inside of this business. We'll get to that shortly. All of our products are inherently AI-native, and I'll talk a little bit specifically about some of the catalysts in the market, specifically around privacy and regulatory tailwinds that are catalysts for the individual stock. A little bit of hygiene here on the capital structure: 126 million shares outstanding.
As I mentioned before, I actually own 40% of this company, not 35%. No debt, $1.5 million warrants in the company. We typically always have around $500,000 in cash. People always want me to have more cash. This is a growth company. Anything over the $500,000 mark, we typically invest back into business to grow the revenue. We have no debt. We used to have debt as an adventure. That's now gone. We have an approved NCIB share buyback program that we actively participate in. Naturally we're biased. We think the stock is undervalued, and if the street doesn't like it, we like it and we'll buy it back. We have about $1.2 million in individual working capital.
The leadership team, me on the left, Jake, who's been with me as a CTO in two of my businesses, is an ex-Cisco, Stuart, the CFO, and Mark Thompson, who's actually new to the individual team. I'll talk more specifically about Mark's role in the company. Now that he's come over, he's literally left NortonLifeLock to come join Reklaim to drive the new product that we recently launched in March called Reklaim Protect, which is about having your data removed from those companies that have it, monitoring your data on the dark web, alerting you to various different data breaches that you can be involved in. It's very helpful to me to have Mark here because it's just one less thing that I have to be involved in.
We feel now, and especially on the Protect side, that we have the product, the leadership, and now hopefully the growth alongside it. Let's talk a little bit about the framework around where we are as an industry and as a business. This catalyst of privacy is changing. Today, the data market is a $100 billion market. Everybody in this room has a data profile. I'm sure everybody can appreciate that. We all know that we have a data profile, but yet none of you have actually access to that profile. That profile acts as a free input to literally every company, AI agent, social network in the world.
Reklaim's whole mission is to provide an ecosystem to allow you to reclaim your data and either option it and receive compensation in the form of a commission every time that data is actually used, or subscribe to a privacy protect product to have your data actually removed from those that actually are using your data without your consent. There's a compensation side or a protect side. What's really changed here in the U.S. is that was the biggest, that is the biggest data market in the world. There have been 20 states that have changed the privacy regulations to enforce that consumers must be involved in decisions as it relates to your data. For anybody that has an iPhone here, that notification that says, are you willing to share your data with the other applications on your phone? Everybody says no. Historically, they never would ask you that. They would just arbitrage your data out the back door. That's a byproduct of some of the changes that are happening in markets.
The takeaway here is consumers are increasingly having to be in the conversation as it relates to their data. The challenge in the market is that's not how the data market has been structured. The data market has been structured as an opaque black box of human arbitrage that is literally changing in front of us. In California alone, there's over 3,000 data brokers generating billions of dollars of selling your data and everybody else's. Those guys are going to zero because of their inability to manage compliance. That demand, all those clients that have been buying that data have to find a new home. Reklaim hopefully is going to be one of those spots. I mentioned the $100 billion market value. I think it's higher than that.
The important thing here too is data is now no longer just an input. It has a legal framework around it. The Attorney General of California is very active on this front. There are now data registries in individual states where if you want to sell data in California, you have to be registered, even if you don't operate there. They have them in California, Texas, and Vermont as well. This will be pervasive across the U.S. The takeaway from here is you have a giant market in transition, one that had never included the consumer to one that actually is including the consumer. This is exactly the place that Reklaim is participating. Okay, two revenue streams here specifically at Reklaim.
For those of you that have been following the story for a while, most people are familiar with the story on the left-hand side. That's the reward side of the business or the traditional Reklaim where, again, think about our revenue as commissionable revenue. Every time we work with you to sell your data to IBM or Microsoft, you generate revenue, we generate a commission. That's how we've grown as a business today. In March of this year, we introduced Protect, really on the understanding that naturally there's a subset of consumers here who want to reclaim their data but don't want to sell it. Historically, if you wanted to reclaim your data and you didn't want to sell it, there was never really a place for you inside of Reklaim.
I was never really comfortable with that because I always knew that half the market wanted to protect their data and didn't want to sell it, but we didn't have a product for that. The introduction of Protect is really to increase the total addressable market for Reklaim. We feel, considering that every consumer has a data profile today, we have a product for every consumer. That gives you a size of the understanding of the total size of the market. Some of you might be interested in selling your data and receiving compensation. Others might be interested in actually just removing it. Some of you might be somewhere in the middle. Rewards. You earn a recurring payment when brands buy your data. When that happens, we receive a commission. In Protect, it's a SaaS-based subscription, $5 a month, $20 -$ 25 a year. That's a very easy thing for everybody to model here. It's how many users do you have, total number of months, up and to the right.
The addressable market of these two products is approximately $115 billion. I talked about the overall data market at being north of $100 billion and then the traditional privacy market. This is where TransUnion, NortonLifeLock, and some of the big boys also play. That's a $10 billion market, put them together. This is the market that we're operating in today. I spoke specifically about the reward side of the business. Everybody wants to know how do you make money? It's really important everybody understands this because this is how the business keeps its lights on. I use this analogy because I actually think it's very similar. You can appreciate that Uber and Airbnb make a commission or take a fee every time they facilitate a ride or a stay. Everybody understands that. We facilitate a transaction of your data, and every time we do that, we take a fee. If we have $6 - $7 million in revenue, that's $6 - $7 million in fees or commissions that we have made from selling your data to Fortune 500 brands. If the revenue goes up 20%, it's because we've been successful in selling more data to more brands on your behalf. It's a bit of a flywheel. The more data we have, the more we can sell, the more money you can make, the more commissions we make, and around and around we go. Hopefully everybody's following.
Let's talk a little bit just quickly about some of the catalysts here as it relates to what we're doing on the reward side. I think I'm particularly excited about this. We've introduced a concept here in the U.S. called the Jackpot. This really fixates on the reward model. The reward model historically was, me as Neil, I sell my data, I generate anywhere from $5 - $10 a month. I redeem that via PayPal, Venmo, Visa, whatnot, and I buy a coffee or I do buy something on Amazon. That's very transactional, very primal. What we've introduced here is a more aspirational concept where, rather than actually transactionally removing your $5, you can actually pledge it to a much larger jackpot. We give it, we do a jackpot of $10,000 a month. The psychology here is people would forego the guarantee of $5 for the opportunity to win $10,000.
To give you some context as to what happened here, we've been running this now for a number of months. 30% of our base is participating in this. Last month, we gave $10,000 to a single mom in Tennessee. She went all over social media saying, I'm part of Reklaim. I've reclaimed my data. It's changed my life. You can naturally compare that to what we've had historically, which is I've redeemed $5. I've actually redeemed a coffee. We are moving to a more general market, more aspirational in nature. I think from a business perspective, there are two things that are really important here. One is it fixes the number of dollars that we actually end up paying out to consumers. Right? Historically, the more consumers come in, the more money you pay out, not with the Jackpot. From a business perspective, it's actually inherently more efficient. It actually also allows us to now promote the brand.
For us, we have an incentive to promote the brand because if 1 million new users come into the product, it has no negative implications on our actual cash structure. That was not the case in the past. For me, I've always believed that Reklaim has been underappreciated from a brand perspective. We've eliminated that with the introduction of the Jackpot. This will probably be the end redemption method for the Jackpot. We believe it's going to go from 30% to 50% to 100%. It should be progressive. As more people are involved in the jackpot, it's not $10,000. It's $15,000. It's not $15,000. It's $25,000. You can understand the psychology around it. Jumping quickly to the privacy market, we think that this is an untapped opportunity.
As I mentioned, we recently brought over the former head of NortonLifeLock to actually run this product. I think that's a good thing, a sign of confidence that you're going to leave an incumbent to come to a smaller company. Right now what we feel is that the incumbents manage about 30% or 40% of the high-end market, $200 a year from an Incogni or a LifeLock or these types of services. We believe the bigger opportunity is in the 70% of the market that is currently untapped, where it's a better price point. The product is inherently comparable. Our products are inherently rooted in AI, where the incumbents are not. This is where we actually think that this incremental revenue stream on top of rewards can be inherently accretive. What this product does, it continues dark web monitoring. Again, everybody here has a data profile.
Your data is all over the dark web. If you're Canadian, you've been involved in the WestJet breach, the LifeLabs breach, and the Ticketmaster breach. That is a perpetual data signal that is sitting on the dark web, acting as an input for fraud and every spam text that you're getting from this point forever. Playing offense on your data and having that data removed is an essential thing moving forward for every consumer. The idea that you're just going to wing it and let your data go wherever it wants, that's the legacy type of thinking. Every consumer is going to have to play offense on their data moving forward. I mentioned continuous dark web monitoring, real-time breach alerts.
When a breach happens at AT&T for the fourth time in the next 12 months, or WestJet leaks your passport information and then gives you credit protection for a year, we will tell you first. You will learn about it first. We'll allow you to change your password and give you opportunities to be alerted to class actions, enroll in class actions, receive compensation regarding class actions, really everything that you need to actually help give you the confidence that your data is back underneath your control. Automated removal at scale. We believe that we have more touchpoints here than any other company in the market. That includes the incumbents. When you sign up to Protect for that $5 a month, we are removing you from close to 1,000 data brokers within the first two weeks of actually being part of this business. We don't think anybody can even touch that. Lastly, AI upsell and stickiness. The product is inherently rooted in AI. We've seen that most of the incumbents are not.
To give you some projections here, I wouldn't look too much at two, three, and four. Look at one because this is a new product. I think the takeaway here is when you look at Reklaim today and you look at the valuation of Reklaim, it's a rearview mirror. What has the rewards business generated? How is the business growing? What does the actual cap table look like? That's what it's being priced at. That's what it's being valued at. No one is putting any value on the Protect side of the business, and I think that would be wrong. For us, the core here is we believe that we can have 100,000 users by the end of Q1. 100,000 users for us at the existing price point is a 50% incremental lift to our existing 30% growth on this business. That to me, again, is being valued at zero in the market today. Whether we do 200,000 whether we do 300,000 whether we do 400,000 users, that's irrelevant. You guys can all do your own models on that. I'd focus on the 100,000. For us, that's our goal where if we can drive 100,000 users into the new Protect product as accretive and incremental to what we're doing on rewards, we think that that's a huge catalyst to the individual business.
Okay, Q2. Just kind of circling back. Where are we now as a business? $1.2 million in revenue, 77%+ margin, minus $141,000 in EBITDA. This is primarily due to the construction of the Reklaim Protect product. We had 73% growth in Q1, profitability for two years, debenture fully removed. I would actually argue that we're in our sixth year, but the company's probably never been in better shape, both from a cap table, financial table, and from a product perspective as well. Growing revenue, we grow. That's what we do. We've had, as I said before, 18% growth in Q2. Our goal for this year is to grow approximately about 25%, 25%. When people ask me how big can the business be, the answer is always the same, as fast as the cash flow permits. We're not a company that focuses on a whole bunch of tuck-in acquisitions. We don't do that. We're not a company that burns cash just to grow top line. That's a vanity metric. We don't do that.
We grow the top line and the profitability business based on the cash flow that we have. The good thing is, with the introduction of these new products, the cash flow is going up, which should stimulate increasingly more and more growth. Okay, why we believe that our moat is growing and getting stronger every year. One, we've been doing this for a while, and I don't think that this is a trivial thing. Every year, there's another one or two companies that leans into the market and tells people they're going to pay consumers for their data. I've been around long enough. Every single one of those companies has gone broke. We're the only company, public or private, that's been able to make this business model work. The only one. Not only have we been able to make it work, we've been able to make it grow and be profitable. It's not trivial. You just don't lean into the market and figure out how to actually build that. We've got a lot of subject matter expertise as it relates to that. We're rooted in privacy, which we think is a larger macro trend. We think that this involvement of consumers and their data is not going away. We also think it correlates very well to the introduction of the privacy market and gives us a bit of a leg up specifically as it relates to Protect. What we've also noticed here too is that we believe that the rewards business, specifically in conjunction with Protect, gives us a competitive advantage over all of the incumbents. None of the incumbents offer the compensation model that we do. We do think that there's differentiation there.
I've talked about the AI agent evolution. I think that's kind of obvious. Big tech people always ask me this question. Why doesn't Facebook do this? On the rewards side of the business, big tech typically doesn't want to do this because they are currently not paying for your data, and they don't want to allow consumers to get an understanding as to just how much money they are making off each and every user. Inside of Facebook, they're making over $100 per user. If the billions of users in Facebook knew that value, we believe that there'd be a coup inside of the walls of Facebook. They're not inspired to actually alert consumers to actually do that. We believe that there's network effects between the two individual products.
My theory here as it relates to AI is that if you're building a product today, it has to be rooted in AI. Building a product rooted in a native application to then migrate to AI is absurd. Similarly, if you have a product that was built in the past that is not migrating right now to AI, you're going to be out of business. This is relevant to us because we launched Reklaim as an application. All of you can go to Reklaim today, download the application, reclaim your data, and participate in any of these products that we mentioned. We believe that the application is going away. We believe that the application is going to be replaced by an AI agent. We expect that to happen in Q1 of 2026. On the reward side of the business, we think that a conversational interface with you and the actual product, specifically around your concerns around your data, is the future of where this market is going. We feel that that is a challenge here specifically for the incumbents who are stuck with the traditional innovator's dilemma: pivot your business, eat your own business, and your multi-billion dollar revenue line to stay relevant, or continue to do what you've been doing. That's where we've been fitting in. Any questions here, guys? Bob?
[There's a certain amount of people who go off a bridge to the bottom and say, "I don't got to go to the dark." If you said, "Hey Bob, look at our website," I'd give you a dang and go, "Oh, they do. There's 18 records for this one." I go, "Crap, I pay $360 a year to grow this one." Anything like that in the works.]
That's exactly what we do. We call that internally unveil, and you'll see that in the next iteration of what we're doing for Protect. We do it in the reward side. In the reward side, you come to Reklaim today, you put in your email address, you validate who you say you are, and then what we do is we show you all the data that is currently circulating on the web. We allow you to reclaim it into the application, at which point you can choose what you'd like to share with the brand. On the Protect side, when you come before you even sign up, you'll be able to come in, put your email address in. This is my email address. We will show you all of the data that is currently circulating on you.
We will also show you where that email address has been breached, every security breach that it's been in, from Caesars Palace to WestJet, so on and so forth. It's a catalyst to say, "Okay, my data is exposed here. Now subscribe to this product." When you subscribe to this product, everything that you just unveiled, we will begin to remove from the various different places we told you. Short answer is it's core to the product. IP is only as good as your ability to defend it in court is my sort of traditional opinion. To me, the IP of our business is really the network effect, I would say, of the various different brands and agencies that are actually buying our data. Do we own patents specifically around that? We do not.
[Follow up. You're asking me to sell for others to build. You mentioned everybody is passionate about it. What differentiates you guys from that?]
I think we're better at selling data. I think the mistake that people make on the reward side of the business, it's really like a two-sided marketplace. There's the consumer side, and then there's the B2B side or the data sales side. It's very easy for people to get excited about this idea of empowering consumers to control their data. My experience has been that most people come in and they go out and acquire a whole bunch of users. The problem with that is when the users come in, if there's no money to be made, they're like, "I'm out." The idea that consumers are going to be willing to give you their data on the hope that you're going to share it, there's no credibility associated to that. The consumer, when they come into the product, they need to make money right away.
As soon as they make money and redeem that money, there's a validation which is like, "Okay, these guys are legit." Now there's no real reason for me to leave because for me to leave, I'd be foregoing any potential future payment. It's that initial kind of 30-day window that I think most companies have got wrong. The last thing on this is that if you bring a user in, assume you buy them for $4 through social media marketing, there's no money for them to be made. The $4 user just churned, which means you have to go get another $4 user, but the money's still not there. They churn. Eventually, you run out of money and then you're upside down. I think the challenge, the mistake that a lot of companies have made is that they've been really focused on the consumer side. Nothing bad happens when you actually sell more data because it all flows downstream to the consumer. The consumer makes more money, they refer the product, they don't leave. We've really focused on sell more data because I could sell your profile to one brand or 40 brands. You don't need to add any net new data to do that. If we focus on getting more and more brands, I think that's sort of the, I don't know if that's a secret sauce, but that's how we focused.
[Sure.]
Protect, it's zeros across the board because it's pretty brand new. I think the intention here is our hope is to get to the end of the year and limp in a number to the market so people can gravitate to that. On the reward side, people don't churn because it's operating in the background. Once you're in, we have less than 2% churn in that product because you're in, it's in the background, you're receiving payment automatically, there's really no reason for you to churn. Once you're in, the churn is basically zero.
[Sure. Do you know if they use our third-party partners?]
Yeah, so a lot of it has to do with, in some of the cases, like, we automatically look at all the companies that are on the state-level registries. If there's 600 companies on the California state-level registry, there is a contact list associated to that. In our product, you literally sign a contract with us where we are acting as the agent on your behalf. We automatically contact every one of those 600 companies with a legal binding letter, which forces them to acknowledge if they have your data and, secondly, to remove it. That's the first way to do it. We also actually, there's other groups of data. People find our sites where we'll actually hit their actual system with an API and consistently look up your data until it's actually removed and say it's still not there. It still hasn't been removed. That's the typical mechanism that we would do.
[Do you have to do like passport photo?]
No, we just need an identifier. We need a phone number, an email address, or a mobile ID, any of those things. Whatever variable you give us is what we will look up in those various different places to say, you just gave me neil@gmail.com. Let's go to all the data brokers to see if they're selling neil@gmail.com. You guys are, you need to remove it based on this agreement that we have with the consumer. They need a legal agreement to do it, but we have that. We send that to them. When you sign up to Protect, you sign the agreement. If they fail not to respond, we automatically send that to the AG. You've had one question, so we'll just ask one more in the back.
I'll just solve a question. As the business scales and I guess if there's any concern that we can't fill it or not, there is a fairly frequent option.
Yeah, I mean, the problem with the slide that is kind of halfway through the presentation, which shows the growth, is everybody fixates on the big number on the end and wants to move it to the front. They're like, Neil, how do you, you want to get to 400,000 users? How do you get 400,000 users in Q1 versus Q4? I'm like, that doesn't happen. We have cash flow, we have working capital, but we don't have unlimited working capital. If we get to a point where we're on a CAC model that's profitable, I think most people would be comfortable in funding that.
For us, I think the intention is that when we're at that point, if we want to put growth capital in to drive the metrics, so if the lifetime value, and we'll just use random numbers, if the lifetime value of the user is $30 and it takes us $10 to acquire the user, so you're plus $20 and you have 100,000 users and your model is sound, that's a good time to pour capital on top of it. That's something that you can present to an investor who can get behind that. Short answer is we don't need it, but if we want to accelerate growth, yeah, of course you're going to need some of that. Okay, one more, last one.
[I think maybe we can have excuses not just for planning to lease, but planning to go to litigation.]
Yes.
[That is one certainty, but it makes sense for you to go to someone like WestJet and say, "Hey, you know, for, I don't know, here's 4% or 5% or 10% of our customers picking up books on this particular thing," and boom, you're out. You can't normally charge you quite many bucks for covering up long-term liability.]
Yeah, so that's actually happening. The privacy expert in the class action against WestJet is actually me. For us, when you actually look in what we believe that there's a gap there specifically as it relates to data and class actions, today you actually have to get a physical check because you were exposed in the Life Labs. We believe that Reklaim can be the fulfillment engine for our data breach settlement in the future. That's part of the strategy, not in the immediate, but in the future. Okay, we're out of time. Thanks, guys. Contact information is here. Thanks so much.