Ann: Trading Halt, page-31

Each of those companies bought had different culture but a tonne of overlap in skill sets. The sum of their combined does not a big company make.

Makes no sense to me other than it gives them entry into this supposed growing market - All predominantly consulting services from memory and none big enough IMHO to really take on many of the bigger US/International players in services/managed services etc where the big dollars are. Add security products to the mix, do any develop anything of substance or just re-sell? Selling penetration tests and relatively small engagements doesn't make for huge potential fast profit growth. The bigger IT/IT Security vendors including the Big 4 have those bigger contracts to themselves for most part.

Longer term, If they can integrate them well and start to penetrate into bigger things, maybe but with so many bigger companies well entrenched into Gov and large corporate, it's going to be a challenge. Most will cannibalise each other so that sum of their combination will shrink before it grows. But maybe I am wrong.

PSZ did it so poorly and they had two strong respected brands in Securus Global and Pure Hacking whose combined revenues and profits pre purchase, dwarf what PS&C do now. Their largest client now is an old client they inherited and the size of the revenue from that one client would not have had that client considered a large client pre-purchase of SG and PH.

TNT/PSZ security needs to get their own strategy together because I can't see what it is. As a shareholder, the best thing in my opinion they can do to help shareholder value grow is to start making announcements about strategy, global partnerships and how they're going to have a better story than just saying they're the largest listed security company on the ASX. That doesn't win business, investment nor growth in share price.