In their presentation on the 29th of Feb, they laid out quite...

In their presentation on the 29th of Feb, they laid out quite clearly their expectations for 2H24 both both Armor and Technology.

I can't seem to see where that 31m is, but it appears they must have included the TPUAS/SUAS support contract in that number, and that goes out multiple years so some of that does not appear to have a FY2024 impact.

At the end of the day, Scott was not wrong in attempting to position this with a run rate amount for Armor and then a more variable Technology business but with increasing revenues from support/spares etc........it was just that he did not seem to have kept the board in the loop and/or there was friction from the start and Scott did not deliver in 1H24 from an overly aggressive and optimistic view of what the business could do.
The focus now without an aggressive salesperson will have to be on costs because this business cannot support $20m in annual costs (well unless they are generating $100m in revenues at a 20% margin)