Thanks @Rapstar for making me think about this. Droneshield is the second largest holding in my portfolio with a solid moat and as a classic averaging down investor one of the few that i have averaged up.

I don’t particularly like the incentive scheme either and hope they don’t buy revenue. I’ll admit I’m unsure how the voting works, the total number of proxy votes are definitely not near the 600 or so million shares on issue. I can’t seem to find why this is? On researching a bit more does anyone use the Australian shareholders association or any other associations as proxies?

Just makes me think I should vote more and pay a bit more attention to these items. Appreciate any enlightenment for what seems simple but the numbers don’t add up for me.

Hey Metis,

Thanks for that.

Would love to hear your thoughts on what the 'moat' is for droneshield.

I'm finding it hard to see why one of the larger manufacturers in the states couldn't just emulate what Droneshield are doing in the blink of an eye.

I mean the tech in the newer radars used by us air force can jam, interfere, direct electromagnetic noise down a boresight, and in principle do anything droneshield could come up with...

They're finding crazier and crazier ways to use the technology every day.

I guess a lot of smaller tech companies feel the same about Apple and Google, just hoping the bigger company avoids the area.

Appreciate any thoughts.

Hi @topowl

have a look at the most recent straw man meeting.

The moat isn't so much in the tech (although this is also probably a moat) rather in the long lead time to getting approval to sell into the various militaries - several years. Oleg addresses this is in some detail

Hi @topowl thanks for asking. I’ll admit that I used the wrong language and moat should have been my own personal ‘psychological buffer’ from being up 90% IRL, which hopefully isn’t confirmation bias…

I choose to still own it despite the lumpy nature of its revenue due to:

• Starting to deliver on revenue stream resulting in bigger contracts with meaningful players.
• Stickiness of this industry and its contracts. Knowing full well the size of the contracts are probable still just testing the tech out for the bigger players. (Not sure how to work if this goes south)
• Believing Oleg in regards to the way he talks about competitors and where they are in the game.
• Unfortunately see drones as being used for multiple nefarious reasons in both war and terrorism. So feel this area, sadly has a huge growth runway with protection in the civilian arena.
• Solid cash balance, with no capital raises in sight (touch wood).

Thanks though as its made me think what would make me sell and when??

Ahhh.....cool.

Thanks for that.

Food for thought.

Appreciated.

Thanks for that Metis, appreciated !