"......... I'll be honest, Epichem was a secondary thought in my...

"......... I'll be honest, Epichem was a secondary thought in my mind when it comes to PAA.....until now. ........."

Believe you have correctly summed it up with that statement LTS's. Suggest it will soon fade back to that state.

Others have pretty much given the reality checks on the arguments for and against and of course there will always be a degree of emotion attached to some part of a business being hived off. If sold then whether at the right price, if closed why now, what else could have been done to avoid yadi yadi yar.

Simple point - How and when it was done can be argued however Epichem is (and was never) not aligned with the core objectives of the PAA primary business model and as such had to go - one way or the other.

The reality is PAA is now at the point of having pretty much completed the development of its CORE product. As I wrote the other day we can now fairly reasonably identify (without the assistance of the often dubiously helpful comms) the key signposts of where things are headed. Jakjazz is pretty much spot on that going forward the org chart for PAA consists of RA, RB, SW & NB - with a new CEO to come and a couple of part time consultants. But guess what, that has already been the case for quite some time !

Suggest that as shareholders we all better hope that a new locally based CEO who can both organize for a good story to be told and then tell it while at the same time negotiate a deal or deals is a very high (in fact the highest) priority.