To expand on my previous comment ... There are two perspectives...

To expand on my previous comment ...

There are two perspectives when analyzing the cost-cutting and focus on profitability. The first is that it is negative - investors hope that small caps are high growth businesses that explode on to the scene like Uber or Amazon, make a huge loss but secure more funding to grow bigger and bigger, then begin focusing on profitability once a certain size has been achieved (and thus benefiting from economies of scale).

However, if you accept that AJX is not an investor's wet dream then the perspective is more positive. The regulatory tailwinds, the macro trend towards sustainability, and the innovative technology are all things that take time to gain traction and adoption. More time than many of us had expected. When it becomes a marathon of time rather than a sprint for explosive expansion, the worst enemy is cash flow.

From what I've seen over the years, AJX was hoping to be perspective number 1 but has now realized it's actually number 2. So the initial attempt to find a million use cases and penetrate every market at once (and even sell at a loss) made sense until it realized that it was number 2. Now that it has come to that realization, it needs to ensure that it has the cash to survive whilst holding out for the cornerstone targets and for adoption to be forced on to customers (by regulatory pressure).

In hindsight, as a B2B business AJX should have realized it was not number 1. Businesses do not jump on every new innovation unless there are clear topline benefits (i.e. increased sales). They focus on the bottom line which means minimizing cost, which means AJX's product will not be adopted until the latest possible time. You can see this is true by the company's customer base. Pillows and mattresses have led adoption because there is a tangible impact to the topline - customers can tangibly feel the difference in AJX's product hence it is a new option to drive increased sales for the bedding company. For businesses outside of bedding, it's much more difficult to justify new tech because there's no direct or clear impact to the customer. Ok, so your tent is now not made of toxic FR, but as a customer when you buy a tent you want to know how big it is and if it can keep you dry outdoors. The mind of the consumer thinks first of utility and does not immediately consider chemical toxicity, which is something that needs to be educated. Educating a market is a long and slow process - think of asbestos and how long that was around for. And yes, the AJX product itself is cheaper but what's not cheap is redesigning your manufacturing lines, replacing equipment, training staff, redesigning business models, changing your marketing campaigns, etc. That's why businesses will move slowly.

The B2C market is a different beast. The reason why Uber and Amazon expanded so quickly is because they are selling directly to consumers who are very quick to react and adopt new products and models. Consumers always demand the best. If AJX was selling a product directly to consumers, it would have made sense to take the number 1 approach.

I see the new changes as being positive because the strategy now reflects what AJX really is as a business - a B2B supplier that needs to hit key targets and hold out for regulation to drive mass adoption. In this kind of market, staying afloat in terms of cash flow is much more important than rapid expansion.

What does that mean for the share price? Well, it's not going to suddenly be worth billions like Uber and Amazon. But what will happen is steady price growth when key clients are acquired and ramp up, followed by occasional spikes following positive regulatory pressure. This is now a 10 year, 10% p.a. growth story instead of a 2 year, 1000% growth story.