Sabine I, for one, cannot respond on your concerns - I do not...

Sabine

I, for one, cannot respond on your concerns - I do not live in WA, and the news to which I provided the link was just something I noticed in ABC News. Anyhow I, and I think Pbawley, have posted that the obsession with NWH's potential revenue is misplaced, because we can now assume it will not be the problem, and the focus should be on the suitability of the projects that NWH wins.

Suitability covers profit margin, skill sets, timing, location, use of existing equipment, the ethics of the party letting the contract, risk spreads, the pace of change, the impact on cash flow, and other things that do not immediately spring to mind. Some of these make up what I call "digestibility".

There is also the balance of new projects in terms of tactical and strategic fit. If NWH wants to expand its presence in a new geography (or increase visibility in an existing one), or it wants to add a new deliverable (e.g., installing conveyor belts), then some compromise of risk and margin can be justified for strategic reasons. This is where digestibility is critical.

I think Management has the ability, experience and sense to progress down a sensible path that optimises all the above factors.