Thanks for your thought out reply. My 2 cents on the...

Thanks for your thought out reply. My 2 cents on the above:

• corporate costs > yeah this would be in relation to new board members including Nathan himself. Agree here
• Accounting flat, I know memberships would most likely have a continual trend, but as you imply the actual training revenue is somewhat more volatile. I note majority of the boon last year was not due to the rapid increase in training hours, but rather the contribution of taxbanter. I suspect overall accounting revenue to still have some modest growth, but even if it doesn't that is fine as over a longer period of time it is a good business with nice high stable margins
• LARs > In my discussion with Nathan (Only mid last month) he had specifically mentioned that the downward trend was largely over and done with as the LARs that did fail their ethics exam (seriously, how tf do you fail this? I've seen it before) have now exited and just a couple laggards are left over with double fails he expects to exit. But majority have passed and will stabilise around 200 or so. As you mention though, the Rev/LAR is way lower than Rev/FAR.
• Benefits from HUB24 partnerships Nathan specifically mentions first access to "HubConnect" which is similar to Netwealths whole of wealth approach too. There is a great service out there called MyProsperity which also does this and has been since well before these 2 products even thought about it.
• Agree that capital allocation is somewhat of a risk here, although was pleasantly pleased reading Kevin White's letters over the years since he joined in 2013, and I note that every year after has been a rather impressive improvement. He is responsible for founding WHK group, one of few successful listed accounting 'roll-ups' if you will. Persistent focus on intrinsic value. From what Nathan told me, buybacks are unlikely to actually happen unless price really gets out of whack. They want to focus on really driving the scale of the overall business rather than per share value as they believe that increased size and market cap will drive more investor interest as well. Tend to agree here, buybacks at this size will be very hard to implement effectively with little to no material volume. (they should of been buying them off Greg tbh).
• Lastly, on the advice practices, what's notable here is that these are licensees, not actual advice practices. Much of the costs are recovered through payments by the adviser. Growing fees per adviser, Hub partnership improvements and the operating leverage of CARE will all contribute to higher margins. There is also optionality here on whatever they decide to purchase via. M&A. Nathan seemed to hint towards a transformational deal sometime in the near future, so that will be something to look out for. (think Centrepoint's acquisition of clearview wealth etc.).

Agree on ROIC etc. but not a dealbreaker