Ann: Fourth Quarter Activities Report, page-24

All IMO as I know nothing as usual
These fluff and branding articles are just that. Media released presented as news.
There is no real data or detail on any numbers or comparison in any way.

It is media bait IMO to fill space in publications. Good for EDE as they may get some sort of enquiry if someone had not heard that they were a player in that field but you have to be realistic about how much serious enquiry you would receive from a fluff piece with no basic data to show " advantages " etc,. Engineers , specifiers etc live on data , performance, results and are very wary of new products for any use as they area risk until proven at scale- usually by someone else for a very long period as industry is risk adverse and slow to change due to longevity of product .

EDE places it's products at great risk if it allows any fly by night people t use it as failure in future of structure using their product ( due to user fault not product fault) so IMO EDE should try and only deal with major players who have quality control at every level not smaller firms who can't back projects and risk use of new products.

In various industries in several countries I have seen for decades I can't tell you how many times a old proven product is specified or used just because it is a " known" and even generic copies are rejected even thought identical but brandname gets gig at higher rate. Very risk adverse to change as there has to be a special quality , value point that a new product meets to even consider a spec change and engineers propose to take on that risk. I often saw clients and advisers would go with large supported brand for reasons such as technical support for product but they never used that support and their usage was not in any way pushing limits of products and designs were so over-engineered it allowed for possible poor placement, possible poor quality etc etc. I have even seen lesser products used at higher unit prices used because they were available or used in prior contract just for ease of sign off. At every level there was over - engineering and that was safety margin and risk adverse culture as retro repairing anything , demolition and rebuild or possibility of claiming or product or own insurances etc was not a realistic resourced economic or reputational option. When any dispute on prior quality appeared often no further tenders would be accepted from those firms until rectification was agreed or process was stared. It is a big stick as businesses need continual work. All companies tendered based on same over-engineered and specced plans so unless a company was to fully reverse engineer all the specs and dates to show saving, increased spec, better safety margins and tick every box for every aspect and back it up with large company guarantees at a enormous resource cost to prepare it wouldn't happen. Basically new products need to be specced in at early stage as a comparison not suggested by a concrete contractor when tendering IMO.

Still trying to work out after years of watching just what EDE strategy is in getting product into projects an getting product used more than once on niche trials It isn't easy when you are not a major or partnered with one. IMO as they just don't have resources. I don't know how they will solve this and targeting same old same old just in a different country hoping for a bigger , quicker adoption seems to be a slow road when they haven't gained traction in any single market for any single sector . Scattergun approach to every application in every sector with small budget seems hard long road and sort o lie lottery odds? I was hopeful with preformed pipes as it is a very controlled environment with a very defined spec but that hasn't resulted in lots of follow up sales- why not? I expected case studies from EDE showing full specs and performance increase in pipes, culverts etc etc , proper comparative study showing value at every level published but nothing detailed that would get competitors interested and show product including EDE products advantage. ? Why don't EDE get to this last stage and publish full examples with real data or road , dock slab performance, pipe preformed performance etc?