I'm getting the feeling you're a bit of a glass half empty...

I'm getting the feeling you're a bit of a glass half empty person stayer

Re MCG lighting, I don't have any views. All I know is SRH is small and nimble. They can try out products and if they don't gain market traction they can (and do) move on to something else. They are innovators, with a very impressive record of getting new products all the way from the conceptual stage to manufacturing, through the regulatory approval processes and out into the market. If they think they can make money from lighting, then I'd back their judgment. And I'd back them to know when to cut their losses on products that don't deliver sufficient profit within a certain timeframe.

Re 'on-grid' - check out the SRH website (which is another impressive aspect of the company).

Re TTI, I can only guess, but I doubt it very much. SRH has a certain culture, which was apparent to me at last year's AGM. They're a team. I'm sure there are plenty of robust debates at board meetings for example, but at the end of the day these guys are a tight team - and I'd be surprised if that team culture didn't extend deep into the company. Taking over another company (particularly one of comparable size) brings the risk of culture clashes. Besides, with its innovation pipeline, SRH doesn't have many constraints on organic growth - ie. they don't need to take over other companies in order to grow.