I did @Valueinvestor0909 - sorry should have posted the response but it was a busy week.

As you know I said I would send the CFO an email in relation to some debtor ageing queries I had. Matt gave me a call soon after to discuss.

With regard to the majority of the balance aged over 90 days:

• Matt wasn't keen to reveal the customer but if you guessed John Deere I don't think you'd be a mile off.
• Apparently they're on 90 day terms (plus end of month) as a tradeoff for the fact that the customer is responsible for pickup of the assets. Matt didn't say so but I don't think 90-day terms are all that uncommon in the industry when you're dealing with Tier 1 players and multinationals. The greater certainty of payment comes with a price. It does make for a working capital challenge though, given suppliers like LBL are paying for materials and wages on much shorter terms.
• Invoices aren't subject to dispute.
• Largely that's what I wanted to hear but the reader can make up their own mind about whether they're happy with this.

With regard to the smaller outstanding balances over 90 days:

• Aren't subject to dispute but are subject to negotiated extended trading terms.
• Typically applies to new customers who need to see cladding works as advertised before making payment.
• My view is this isn't ideal and is a greater risk of non-recovery, but when you're grafting to grow a business you sometimes have to agree to less-than-ideal terms.

With regard to the figure in the table not matching the commentary:

• Basically a stuff up
• It sounded like there was a late change to the presentation of the provision balance at the auditors request (see FY24 versus FY25). The table got updated but the commentary didn't.
• I think you know my views on this. It's annoying, it shouldn't happen, but it does - what are you going to do?

Also had a chat about the recent Technology licensing sale. It's an existing customer who will use the Technology on their own fleet. They're not competing with LBL but they potentially lose some business from the customer directly. However, the sale is priced accordingly, they maintain a relationship with the customer and they will continue to support the sale and receive some revenue from it.

Held IRL only - not sure why I haven't added them here. Might have to correct that.

Nice pick up @Noddy74. My questions were also missed (not as curly as yours!) so let's wait and see how they go getting back to us.

@Strawman I agree with your view. I think you summed up LBL brilliantly on the A Rich Life Small Cap Wrap podcast the other week. Investors greatly overestimate most management teams' ability to accurately forecast/control their businesses and are far to quick to attribute guidance misses or underperformance as incompetence or even nefariousness. It's business in the real world, unfortunately things often do go as smoothly as the lines on our spreadsheets want them to!

As you said, the question we need to focus on is whether something has structurally changed for the business and I agree with your view that for Laserbond nothing really changed over the medium/long term. We had classic situation of short term operational weakness combined with a high earnings multiple which leads to a market that lets the share price performance cloud their view of the underlying business.

Anyway, rant done. These results were very good. Most of the questions on the call were focused on whether the 2H momentum can be maintained, and for good reason because if that is the case LBL will be reporting record results in FY26. Gross margins in the 2H were back to record highs:

Opex was also well controlled, and while still above FY23 levels showed a strong recovery:

Wayne stepping down was a bit of a surprise, especially given the last time you interviewed him a couple of months ago I believe he said he had a few years left. That said, the transition looks well handled and Rob's resume is impressive.

Also great to see a solid Tech sale, bit surprised it wasn't a bit more prominent in the announcement or presentation but given the issues with delivering Tech sales in the past perhaps management being a bit more conservative there.

The business has turned around. They just need to execute.