Thanks very much @LifeUniEvery42 for adding to my notes. You...

Thanks very much @LifeUniEvery42 for adding to my notes.

You asked a very pertinent question. I am sure the Board asked the same question. Richard said these words and this sums up the whole discussion for me. He said, "Focus is imperative to success".

Henry wanted to spread the resources across the globe. Richard wants focus on those markets where demand has now shown itself to be. Strike now while the iron is hot in the Middle East, China and SE Asia where the take-up for MABR and Nirobox are faster in coming, rather than allocate resources in the US and the rest of the world.

Management has a dilemma. I can appreciate that. Richard has won out. But I don't have an answer which is better.

Both tacks have implications which you have alluded to. If Henry had his way, FLC would be a diversified animal with more broad based geographical growth, spread across the CES and SPS product segments, whereas Richard's way means that more focused growth will be skewed towards SPS in the Middle East, China and maybe SE Asia. Henry's growth gradient would be gradual and arithmatic. Richard's profit gradient, if the bets come in, will be steeper, more geometric.

I know the market wants the latter. They want to see Richard's geometric growth pattern. From a professional management's standpoint, they prefer the former because their jobs are more assured. We are close to inflection. GLTA.