@stockrockI've always thought Fluence was relatively clear with...

@stockrock
I've always thought Fluence was relatively clear with backlog, I'm not sure where sell was coming from but if he's thinking that then I'm sure some other investors were thinking similar. Anyway, now there is a pretty clear definition on the investor presentations so their Investor Relations shouldn't have to field as many questions about backlog.

Fluence are pretty open with the info they provide to investors, more so than most. I was turned into a webinar for CleanTeq Water and the CEO who is based in China was asked a question about target margins on some of their water treatment plants. Answer: "CONFIDENTIAL!!!!!" There is that fine balance between keeping confidentiality of contract negotiations and competitive advantage, and keeping shareholders informed. Fluence tend to keep the shareholders informed, CNQ are a bit more of a closed book.

Q3 cashburn was way better than I expected. I expected it to revert back to looking a bit ugly. Seems like the company has worn most of the restructuring costs since Richard took over from Henry, staff costs only $5m Q3 compared to $13m Q1 + Q2. This is before they even sell off the Italian division and with it reduce staff further.
I agree with you that cash-burn is of the most interest to investors, but the revenue is a fascination for me, as I do wonder what it will take for the market to recognize that a penny company of $120 mill AUD market cap pulling consistent $130 million AUD full year revenue is not normal.