Agreed entirely. And rather quite salty I missed PET (just...

Agreed entirely. And rather quite salty I missed PET (just didn't have enough capital to invest). PET is an awesome buy.

My only point is that PET is not directly comparable with FLC. Which it isn't, the recurring revenue for PET is no where near FLC and it's not the same. The IC contract is a good example, but it's not indicative of the product offering FLC has when you actually analysis FLC's revenue base and product suite. Here's a couple more to illustrate further:

• FLC sell water desalination treatment solutions, PET does not
• FLC integrates with the incumbent water infrastructure (in a meaningful way), PET does not (it simply treats the body of water).
• FLC has an extremely large infrastructure/contractual exposure, PET sells units (i.e. bags). FLC's Smart Product Solutions are expanding into a unit-based sales model, but these remain infrastructure augmentation rather than throwing a bag of PET chemicals
• FLC's SUBRE solution retrofits existing water treatment facilities to reduce their opex by 80%, PET does not
• FLC's operates (in a meaningful way with respect to revenue) across 70 countries, PET does not (despite good wins with the London Olympics et al)
• Aftermarket sales constitute a much higher proportion of the original revenue yielded from FLC's projects and product sales. This is not applicable for PET. Whilst PET can enjoy ongoing sales from already-treated water bodies, it is a fraction of the amount required for the initial treatment. This is because whilst blue-green algae grows fast, it doesn't grow fast enough to justify the original amount of PET product required when the water body was pre-treated.
• PET's product can yield biodiversity and actually has been shown to improve animal life (and therefore yield). FLC's does not.

Again, not bagging (pun intended) on PET at all. I wish I had bought it and it seems to be an excellent investment. But to say PET's on a P/E of X so therefore FLC should be on a P/E of Y is not fundamentally accurate. Whether or not the market see's is this way is an entirely different debate to which I would concede has demonstrated a fundamental lack of rationality.