Thanks for sharing @lastever, i wasn't able to make the meeting but will watch the recording.

Honestly, I think management can sometimes be overly accommodating in regard to investor demand and expectations. Of course, the CEO and their team are our (shareholders) employees, and they should be accountable to what we want, but I generally prefer to see strong leadership that has a clear idea of the situation and have a decisive strategy on how they will deliver results. If there's any conviction behind their thinking, they don't need to be apologetic (and if we disagree we can always vote with our wallets)

By all means, treat your investors with respect, but you should be able to articulate a clear and reasoned rationale for your decisions. eg We are using Adjusted EBITDA because we want a clear view of the underlying economics of the business, and one that better aligns with cash flows. Here are the adjustments being made, and this is why it makes sense. And we're also adding back capitalised costs because those costs are, frankly, very real -- we want a positive number here as it should reflect, to some degree, a smoothed out version of free cash flow. By the way, here are the other statutory figures, so you can focus on what you like, but we focus on this and for these reasons.

To be clear, I'm not saying that this is the situation here, necessarily, but they've obviously chosen it as a key metric, and should be able to explain why that is, and why it's reasonable. If they can't, they either don't have a good reason or are afraid to admit what the real reason is. Being wishy washy, as you say, isn't a sign of a strong leadership imo.

Anyway, I'm ranting on a very small aspect of a second hand account of what happened, but I wish more CEOs had the courage of their convictions, and that are prepared to push back (with respect) on a lot of what investors say.

In terms of the results themselves, they were again "ok" but not great. There's just no acceleration in ARR growth.

Industrial was again the best segment, but the 16.1% ARR growth is a bit spurious given they include the recently bundled Water ARR here (backing that out and growth in ARR was closer to 8%). Looking at things on a constant currency basis makes the growth even more anaemic.

The outlook for 2-2.5m in new ARR is a bit encouraging, especially in light of cost controls. But I'll believe it when I see it.

IF they can do that, and IF we see a further acceleration in revenue growth, shares seem somewhat cheap at just 1x ARR, especially if they do become sustainably self-funded. If not, well, there's not a lot of optimism in the price anyway, so perhaps there's a bit of asymmetry in terms of return potential.

Still, I can't justify my previous 15c valuation anymore. I'll re do the numbers soon.