DST (Dynamic Stabilisation Technology) Game Changer or Not?, page-40

Did not say DST was useless, it is actually very useful. This technology needed to happen for digital construction to be effective. My supporting argument is that a lot of OEMs don't like to spend time or resources developing this type of solution. They first look for something that is available in the marketplace so they can rapidly apply it to their large market shares of machines going out into the world. I did talk about reverse engineering Hadrian X and I believe that there are many companies that could do this. However, I don't know what the time frame would be or if they would make it past the patents. It would be very costly and the results could be nil. I wrote this shortly after CAT and FBR dissolved the agreement. I was excited about this because it no longer meant that these machines were going into other people's hands. All HadrianX would reside inside the company only further protecting them.The whole premise of that previous post was based on the scenario that other companies could get their hands on the machine. Easily replicated is being very simplistic, considering there will no longer be uncontrolled access to a HadrianX, reverse engineering is no longer an option. The way FBR has handled this was through WaaS business model that allows the machines to provide cashflow overtime instead of initial sales. One model is inherently more dangerous to the company than the other. For me, this was blatantly clear that the Pivacs we're thinking very strategically.