The questions
Every question below rests on something the company has published itself, footnoted to its source. None asks the board to reveal anything confidential, and each can be answered in a sentence or two — the status under each shows whether it has been. They were sent to Freightos investor relations on September 9, 2026. If you're a shareholder, ask them yourself: write to Freightos investor relations or raise them on the next earnings call.
Growth
The current investor presentation targets revenue "Growth of 25-30% per year" for 2027–2030,1 as the company's presentations have since February 2024.3 On the May 2026 earnings call the CEO said "a 20% plus growth trajectory in 2027 and beyond."2 The gap between the two numbers is the difference between a growth company and an average one.
Which is the company's 2027 target — 25–30%, or "20% plus" — and does the board still stand behind the 25–30% framework?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
25–30% a year is the company's own plan for 2027–2030.1 The delivery for 2026, as guided in August: revenue growth of 3–5%.17 On our arithmetic, growing this year at the rate promised for next year would have added roughly $4.6M of revenue and $3.4M of gross profit — about half of this year's guided adjusted EBITDA loss.5
If the company has a playbook for 20–30% growth, why was it not run in 2026 — and what would it have done for 2026 EBITDA?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
The offices of CMO, CRO and SVP R&D have stood empty for months.6 A CFO was appointed on August 17, 2026, effective September 1 — the only executive hire in 2026 that we know of.18 The company's own leadership page lists three executives.12
Who will deliver the growth guided for 2027, and by when will the remaining seats be filled?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
Enterprise sales cycles are long, and hiring the people who work them takes quarters, not weeks. Growth meant to appear in 2027 — a jump from the 3–5% now guided for 2026 to 20–30%1,17 — has to be built during 2026. Two-thirds of the year is gone.
What headcount, sales capacity and pipeline are already in place for 20–30% growth in 2027 — and how much of that target does the board consider covered?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
Strategy
A "Solutions-first strategy" was announced on February 23, 2026.7 The second quarter was the first executed entirely under it. Solutions revenue fell 4% year on year to $4.8M, after growing 3% a quarter earlier,10 while Platform revenue grew 19%.8,17 The CEO attributed the decline to "the execution gap identified during 2025"19 — a gap the company now says it had identified in 2025, before it made Solutions the first priority. Three months earlier he had told investors the Solutions pipeline was "approximately double what it was a year ago."2
What has Solutions shipped since February, and what did a pipeline twice last year's size convert into? And if the segment's problem was an execution gap known in 2025, why did the board pivot the company toward it — and when will the fix show up in the numbers?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
Take the Solutions-first strategy7 at its word — a prioritization I don't support, but set that aside. The quarterly KPIs the company reports are Platform metrics: the July release on second-quarter KPIs is titled "Platform KPIs" and reports transactions and gross booking value, with no Solutions metric at all.9
If Solutions now come first, why is no Solutions KPI reported quarterly — and what metrics should shareholders use to track the strategy the company chose?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
Second-quarter transactions were a record 458k, up 15% year on year; gross booking value a record $422M, up 33% — both above management's own expectations.9 Platform revenue grew 19%. Solutions revenue fell 4%.17 The board's February strategy puts Solutions first.7
With the Platform growing 19–33% on every measure and Solutions shrinking, on what evidence does the board still rank Solutions first — and what would make it reverse that ranking?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
Adjusted EBITDA is guided to −$6.9M to −$6.4M for 202617 — about $4.6M better than 2025's −$11.2M.25 Almost none of that comes from the business: revenue is guided to grow 3–5%, worth roughly $0.9M of gross profit,25 and gross margin is down from its peak — 69.1% IFRS and 74.8% non-IFRS in Q3 2025, against 67.6% and 74.1% in Q2 2026, with neither peak regained in any quarter since.4,17 So roughly $3.7M — four-fifths of the improvement — is cost taken out,25 in the year promised as one of "operational discipline and execution focus."7
What was cut — and how much of the sales, marketing and engineering capacity that 20–30% growth in 2027 depends on went with it? And when does gross margin get back above its Q3 2025 peak?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
AI agents are beginning to price, quote and book freight — in our view the biggest opportunity, and the biggest risk, in front of the company. In February the board made Solutions — SaaS-shaped software — the first priority,7 at the moment the market began recognizing that AI agents commoditize exactly that kind of workflow software; by the second quarter the company was reporting "some pricing pressure on renewals" in Solutions.19 A neutral marketplace is what those agents will need to transact on, and the company's long-term framework sets out financial targets but no AI strategy.1
Where does the board see AI changing how freight is bought and sold, how will Freightos lead that change rather than be displaced by it, and what is it investing today?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
Governance
On July 8, 2026, Zvi submitted three resolutions for this year's AGM in compliance with Article 19.5 of the company's articles, which required 120 days' notice.16 Other shareholders are interested in these resolutions. The board has already had more than two months to consider and confirm this straightforward matter of shareholders' rights, but has repeatedly declined to give a substantive response. This week its counsel said the board would consider the resolutions "at its next meeting" on or before November 4, which is day 120, and may leave just 14 days' notice for Zvi and other shareholders to review the response, before the proxy statement is mailed out, clearly insufficient time for any legal process.26
Is the delay designed to leave shareholders too little time to enforce their right to a vote before the proxy mails? If not, why do three properly submitted resolutions take four months to answer? And will the board confirm now that shareholders will vote on all three, in full, by proxy and at the AGM?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
The company's 2025 Form 20-F states that Mr. Michael Schaecher is not an independent director.11 Yet he is not listed as an executive officer in that filing11 or on the company's leadership page, as the other non-independent director is.12
What relationship or arrangement makes Mr. Schaecher non-independent under the Nasdaq listing standards, and why has that relationship not been disclosed?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
On his appointment in July 2025, the chairman said the board and he were "excited to continue to steer the company on its next chapter."15 Since then CRGO has fallen 62% (at the close of September 8, 2026, the day before this question was submitted) while the Nasdaq Composite is up about 25%,14 the executive team has thinned rather than grown,6 and his board term runs to 2028 unless shareholders cut it short.13
What was the "next chapter" the chairman had in mind, by what criteria was its success to be judged — and what outcome, by when, should shareholders hold him to now, with what accountability if it is missed?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
Freightos directors serve staggered three-year terms; the class elected in 2025 runs to 2028.13 Annual election of every director is the governance standard: "All directors should be elected annually. Boards should not be classified (staggered)," in the words of the Council of Institutional Investors, a position ISS and Glass Lewis share.24 Zvi has proposed resolutions to make that change, submitted July 8, 2026 under Article 19.5 of the company's articles, in time for this year's AGM.16
When the resolutions come to a vote, will the board recommend that shareholders vote for them — and make itself more accountable, in line with best practice?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
In October 2025 the company adopted a new director compensation package in which most non-employee directors receive share options in three tranches, struck at $5.00, $10.00 and $15.00; two directors were granted a further 100,000 options each, on the same three strikes, in January 2026.20 The company priced the other half of that package off a share price of $3.24.20 The shares have not reached even $3.00 at any point in 2026, mostly trading well below $2.00.21 Revenue grew 3% last quarter, and the third quarter is guided to 1–2%.17
On what basis does the board expect the shares to reach $15 — what growth, over what period, gets there? And if it does not expect that, what is the option component of director pay for?
Asked September 9, 2026 — awaiting reply
If you would like to see these answered, register your interest — and put them to the company yourself.