FBR General Discussion, page-7555

The Pivacs have built an excellent machine, no doubt about that one from my end. The lack of transparency has always been some cause of concern for me.

I am in the Projects Management space, and for every piece of equipment being tested, apart from producing to the quality claimed, reliability is important. Put loosely, run the machine daily where possible, and determine how long it runs before it needs attention. MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure), if the machine is subjected to its regular grind, how long does it run before it fails? The longer the better? Then MTTR (Mean Time To Repair) - the average time to do repairs and get the machine back into service. The shorter the better. I don’t know if the HX has been put through it's paces long enough to reliably measure these metrics, from available information I dare say No. If it has, then that has not been made public. This business of building one structure then going back to the shed won't tell us how reliably the HX will perform when in commercial service.

Mark Pivac is an Aeronautical Engineer, he will be very well versed with this. For those familiar with Six Sigma, will know that Air Travel is a true "one in a million failures model", and arguably one of the safest mode of transport. The Airline Industry does Reliability and Continuous Improvement very well, and Mark being from that industry gives me some level of confidence.

For transparency I carry 3.5 million shares after a couple of top ups. For reasons I stated above, I still see some risk with FBR. The bulk of my portfolio is WBC, BHP, WES & FMG. I rarely comment on those, they are somewhat consistent and boring, and Iwork for one of those. I am also into small time property investment, two properties in VIC and two in WA, plus the one I live in. I am 4 years shy of fifty. Enough about myself. FBR comes across to me like they could achieve big things, and if they don't the boys pay themselves well, lifestyle won't change much!