I absolutely agree the guiding statement can be interpreted in a...

I absolutely agree the guiding statement can be interpreted in a number of ways, not only in terms of when the plants will be completed (from now to 18 months away, or from 12 to 18 months away), but also what 'completion' actually means (completion of contract discussions, completion of plant build?)

I don't think the ambiguity is accidental. I believe the company may be phrasing this in such terms so that it can be interpreted positively by Bulls, but also give them enough wriggle room to fall back to the more conservative interpretation later next year if/when the targets look shaky

In my view, the management team have not always demonstrated a willingness to be 100% transparent. They use ambiguity to their advantage. A few days ago we were discussing the C17 mw targets. Any reasonable person reading the May and Nov 16 presentations would have assumed this referred to new projects. But the announcement from yesterday moved the goal posts on us.

Having been burnt once why should we now interpret their newest ambiguous piece of guidance with the same rose colored glasses? I won't. The market at large hasn't either.