I too was confused regarding the discussion about FY27 sites being added whilst not commenting on the number for FY26- one would have thought they could much more accurately predict FY26- its a number i will be watching closely in each half yearly report

other than that a rather boring meeting to be honest. Its a simple business with lots of growth potential however i fully agree with mike that the big risk here is government regulation- it can lead to an almost immediate revenue rug pull in any jurisdiction (like QLD)

in saying that its a well run business with a solid management team and a long opportunity runway

new countries helps alleviate any single jurisdiction risk also and i think its smart to keep adding new countries

i can see this business churning out lovely earnings and a nice dividend in years to come!

held in RL (10%) i wont go much above 10% given the jurisdiction risks

@twee good notes. Some comments from me in three areas:

New Sites Target

Yes, I also noted the FY27 target for new sites, and wondered if this was a typo (as there were a few others in the preso). But in the transcript, Paul and CFO between them say "Yeah, in the presentation we said its 500-700 sites for FY27. Just how does that break down ... UK 300 ...100 NZ ... 100 Germany ... US was still in our building phase but we are looking at somewhere between 30-50 ANPR locations by year-end this year as a financial year-end."

So I was confused when I heard the reply and also confused when I listened to the playback recording and read the transcript. It seems to mix this year and FY27.

It seems pretty clear to me that they did not want to communicate target information for the current year. Both Paul and his CFO said the presentation number was FY27. But in Paul's reply he is clearly referring to a US number for the current year.

Pretty sloppy communication, actually. But was it purposefully ambiguous? I don't know. And it probably doesn't matter too much. Given they are at 1,799 sites at 30-Sept, then if they do +400 in FY26, +600 in FY27 and +300 in 1H FY28, that gets well over 3,000 by Dec-28.

Denmark

I asked a question about Denmark:

Q: "Okay. Question from for Michael. Can you explain more fully how you're using technology to overcome the regulatory ruling in Demark? And how do you issue the physical PBN? Is there a way to grow this business profitably?"

A. from Paul. "Well, I'll answer your last question first, is there a way to grow this profitably? Absolutely, yes. And we want to be in Denmark because there is high ticket values there had breach values as well as high payment ratio. These are 2 things we look at. If we look at -- compare that with New Zealand, for example, so the actual breach value there is a bit lower at $85 versus NOK 120 -- sorry, NOK 720, which is about AUD 120. So I think when you get high ticket values and then you get a high payment ratio, clearly, it's profitable. Now the challenge we're facing at the moment is because we've been operating an ANPR operator exclusively, the majority of the locations are around Denmark. They're a bit more spread out. Versus if you put them all in a much tighter location around Copenhagen and not far out, it's easier to get around them with manual team that is currently being driven by our technologies on the site today. So that's what I'm talking about around technology. We also have a handheld solution that can -- which is very quick at issuing those breaches. So when the attendant is there, they can do a very quick sweep of the car park, understand where the predesign issue fast, which is a good health and safety or OH&S feature as well.

So I think number one, we absolutely want to be there. We definitely can grow that as a manual business and be very profitable. We also see it as a launch pad for the rest of Scandinavia. We can access -- we know we can access keeper details in Sweden, in Norway and also in Finland. So as a result, in time, we will be looking at expanding those but utilizing Copenhagen as the hub as the processing environment that will drive all of Scandinavia."

So, it is clear to me that they are refocussing their plan for Demank to concentrate of areas of high site density, so that the manual PBN-issuing doesn't destroy operaring margins. I think we speculated as much when the news broke at the last results. The new insight is that with a PBN at A$120 and high payment compliance, that offers a bit headroom for some labour cost and extra technology, provided the carpark density is high enough. It makes sense to me.

UK

Another public consultation on the Code of Practice is underway - having started in September. It is likely to lead to a government response in a few months, followed by a round for staekholders to reply (another 3-4 months). I'm going to do some research on what some of the consumer advocates are pushing for on this. After all, should there be an adverse regualtory change in the UK, then that would send some shockwaves. To be clear, there is no evidence that anything adverse is coming. But this is a perennial risk, and one I continue to manage by position sizing.

Strong shareholder support on all 4 resolutions.

Disc: Held