It largely depends at how you look at the scenario described by Laurie Fialkov.
Say entity A have a high market penetration globally, territory regulations and licensing prevents them to push more capacity outside their hosted environments. One territory includes SA, but due to certain limitations (which the consumer have very little detail on) prevents them to push, thus they need to expand within this territory namely SA.
Now entity A approach SA entities B, C and D, where B and C are signed partners, D is an alternative. B and D provides a positive answer, C withdraws due to their own limitations. Now a race between B and D begins… however, A knows clearly about the existing limitations, thus ask B and D to do the initial investment until SA is ready to be penetrated by a proper implementation made by A themselves. B withdraws in order not to risk a possible contract breach already in place due to certain calculations made. C wants to go ahead, here is where the terms change, this is why the consumer ask so many questions, especially why A is not here already.
Laurie is protecting his space, that's it.
