Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the FY 2026 results presentation for The Environmental Group. I'm joined today by Gareth Nicholls, the CFO, and Paul Gaskett, the Chief Commercial Officer.

Gareth will talk through some numbers and if you've got any questions, Paul will be able to certainly address your issues with PFAS. As we move through the presentation, I'll welcome questions at the end.

Tough year, as you all know, with some unexpected events that took place around the world that impacted our business we couldn't control, and then others within that we should have had more control over. At the end of the day, I'm pleased to say that we met the revised guidance that we put out to the market earlier this half.

Revenue, I guess, flat year on year is really a reflection of the Baltec customers and some of the delays we had with the events in the Middle East. ERP now, thankfully, is operating functionally.

We still have room for improvement and efficiencies to put through, but it's operating as it should, and the system is far more efficient, accurate, and performing as it should have done. Significantly, and I guess something we haven't spoken broadly about, is the strength that we've brought to the management team this year.

The business has grown substantially from turning over sort of $40 million to $110 million. We've introduced a new CEO of EGL Baltec during this period.

We've obviously brought on Gareth Nicholls as new CFO, who's worked very hard on trying to get the systems in place and make sure we got the quick process and procedures. Kirill, who is Head of Engineering, is also taking over as General Manager of TAPC.

Very significant management changes within the business and a real strengthening of that management team during this period. Just in summary, as I said, revenue was flat basically on PCP at $112 million.

EBITDA came within our guidance at $8.7 million. Pleasedly again, 419,000 hours worked, up from about 380,000 last year.

We had one very minor LTI, which is a laceration to a finger, but for 419,000 hours, we can always do better, but a good result. PFAS, which Paul will talk to later on, we're getting a lot more traction now.

We're really looking forward to the expansion of that business, and we treated over 5 million liters of PFAS-contaminated water during that period, and at the same time maintained all of our global certifications to deal with clients such as Siemens and our larger overseas clients that require those for. Importantly, Gareth is going to take now through an earnings bridge just to talk about the result and how it was structured for FY 2026, and I guess just provide some comfort as to what's happened and where we're now up to within the business.

I'll hand over to Gareth to talk to you about the numbers.

Thanks, Jason. As Jason just mentioned, FY 2026 was a disappointing year from an EBITDA perspective.

We entered the year expecting to build on the strong growth achieved over recent years. However, as outlined in our trading update, performance was impacted by a combination of factors, including disruption associated with the Middle East conflict and challenges following the implementation of our new ERP system.

Thankfully, most of those ERP-related issues are now resolved. We recognized $10.8 million of significant items, including a $5.7 million impairment of the Airtight business.

Structural changes in the Airtight market have reduced the carrying value of the business, while delays in legal proceedings resulted in a charge having to be taken in relation to an onerous contract inherited as part of the acquisition of that business. Legal proceedings relating to the onerous contract are ongoing, with a substantial recovery being pursued.

To that extent, a contingent asset has been disclosed in the annual reports in relation to the potential recovery, but no asset has been recognized as at 30 June. Go to the next slide, please, Jason?

Yep. Oops, sorry.

There we go.

Despite revenue being broadly flat year on year, we continue to strengthen the quality of our revenue base, with recurring revenue increasing to $61.9 million. Over the past five years, the group has delivered substantial growth supported by both organic initiatives and strategic acquisitions.

This recurring revenue foundation provides greater resilience in future earnings. Next slide, please.

More than 55% of FY 2026 revenue was recurring or contracted in nature, providing a strong foundation for the group. EGL Energy continues to be the largest contributor to this recurring revenue base.

We remain focused on increasing recurring revenue across the group, which will further enhance earnings stability. I'll now pass back to Jason.

Thanks, Gareth. I'll take you through the operating divisions now and how their performance was for FY 2026 and how we're seeing the early days of FY 2027.

I'll start off with EGL Energy, which is obviously our boiler business where we're using steam mainly for the function of sterilization. It's an essential service used throughout any food productions, hospitals, anywhere you need sterilization processes.

Acquisition has gone very well with ABC, Advanced Boilers & Combustion, for over a year ago now, probably a year and a half ago now. They've integrated into the business really well, which has been terrific to see.

Revenue, good growth again, up to $64.5 million, up 20%. Gross profit increased another $3.4 million, up 21%.

You'll note, as we've spoken about a few months ago now, that EBITDA was down marginally to $7 million, mainly due to the impact of the ERP system, the issues that we had with invoicing at the time, and also the fuel price. We've got about 133 vehicles in our fleet.

Ballpark, if they're doing 150 ks a day, we're doing 22, 23,000 kilometers a day in our fleet. Certainly the massive increase in the diesel price had a significant influence before able to put through changes in our travel costs within that business.

Service revenue grew from about $41 million up to $47 million, now 73% of the entire revenue within that business. The business remained very strong in its underlying performance.

It met its budget expectations on revenue, and it was just purely that issue we had with the invoicing and the performance during that second half that impacted the EBITDA. I'm pleased to say that the business is trading normally again now and in line with expectations, post the rectification of some of the issues with the ERP system.

E-boiler sales have been particularly strong in early FY 2027, which has been great to see. The Fulton product sales and service expansion continues to be strong for Tomlinsons.

That range that we brought in for the smaller scale boilers, sort of 2 megawatts and lower has gone very well. As I mentioned, I couldn't be more pleased with the acquisition of Advanced Boilers & Combustion.

They've increased the scale of our business and broadened the product and service capabilities, they're doing a lot of additional work for us now. They're manufacturing our PFAS separation tanks, control panels across the business, tanks and vessels and other structurals.

A great culture within that business where they've been very good at being able to assist the other parts of the business to make sure that we're getting all of the margin maintained in-house. Very pleased with how that acquisition has gone.

Just move on to Waste now. I'm sure at the end Paul can answer any further questions you have on PFAS.

It's truly been, for me, an exciting period, and especially a exciting last I guess six to eight months within that PFAS treatment business as we've learned more about the technology, its application around the marketplace. From a pure financial view, revenue up to $5 million, we've grown that business from nothing a few years ago to $5 million now.

I wouldn't worry about the gross margin too much, that's just purely depending on the timing of when we get commissions on plant sales. The focus really now is developing that PFAS side of the business.

Patent the technology, protect it across Australia, US, and Europe. R&D investment has broadened the range of wastestreams that we can treat.

Most of you will be aware that we built a simulation plant close to a year ago now, where we could put in wastestreams from the marketplace and test them to see what would happen out of our commercial scale plants. That is an absolutely accurate simulation plant, and we've been able to prove that we've done a much broader base of PFAS treatment across water, soil, and biosolids.

That's been a big move forward for the group. Previously, as you'd be aware, we'd really focused on water and water from industrial wastestreams and landfill leachates.

To be able to broaden that out has given us a much, much bigger addressable market and very applicable in other parts of the globe as well. By way of example, PFAS-contaminated biosolids in the US is quite a big deal now, and it's opening up those very, very large markets for us to enter.

The capabilities really give us the potential to improve their beneficial reuse outcomes, avoiding landfill or specialist disposal, and reducing those disposal costs for our clients. One of the key learnings we had from a recent trip to the US is mobile treatment plants capability is very important for rapid deployment within that marketplace.

Where you've got those very large waste companies going from site to site and treating, for example, a landfill leachate on those ponds over what can potentially be tens of, if not hundreds of sites within those very large companies. That was a further development we've pushed ahead with.

As I mentioned, the increase in those wastestreams materially increased our addressable market, and the global presence of the PFAS contamination looking for PFAS solutions. We're very pleased to expand what we can now treat and the manner in which we can do it.

It was a period of really, really great development for our PFAS technology and broadening those commercial applications. As I mentioned to you earlier, we've just had Paul and others in the US talking about global market development strategies and meeting with some very large US companies and other international companies.

Pleased with how we're now developing that segment, and I'd like to think that will grow in the importance of part of our business going forward. I'll just move now on to EGL Baltec.

Reasonably tough period for Baltec in the second half. The impacts came through from the Middle East.

The business, as it's a global business where we're agnostic to where we operate around the world. Last half, we actually had three jobs within that region that got impacted in one way or another by what transpired in the Middle East.

Revenue, as we mentioned a few months ago, was down about $7 [to?] $8 million below expectations.

A couple of jobs that suffered delays in the Middle East have now been sorted out. We had a job going to Iraq that the client had enormous problems getting there, as you can well imagine.

There was another client's project going to that part of the world that we also couldn't get to the client's site. They've both been sorted out now.

The project in Iraq is now on site. The other one's in transport into, I think it's Uzbekistan.

That's all been completed. I'm pleased to say that we did manage to increase the margin during that period despite what happened with the delays within those projects.

We also had another project delayed in its completion because we could not get parts out of Europe into our manufacturing facilities because of what happened in the Straits of Hormuz and what also happened within the closure of the Suez Canal to commercial traffic. That's now resolved as well.

What is really important is we've had Rob Chignell join us as General Manager of Baltec. He's got a lot of industry experience within the power industry coming from very, very large company background, and is already implementing changes to processes and systems within the business that I think will see not only a better quality product for our client, but improvement on project delivery coming through.

The macro view is the demand for gas turbines in the US remains unprecedented, as driven by data centers seeking to secure their own power supply generation. As you can imagine, previously power was just coming in off the grid.

They now want the power behind the gate with their own turbines. That's seen a significant change within the marketplace.

We've seen record high turbine orders, but being redirected into the US from other global markets, which is an interesting change within that market. I guess in response to that, we've signed an agency agreement within the US in a key hub in the Midwest for engineering procurement to make sure that we're involved heavily in that market and understanding what's going on within that marketplace.

Currently, we're now quoting a number of jobs in the US on RFQs in that data center marketplace. I think we might have three or four we're currently in tender for.

That strategy has worked quite well. Obviously, the expansion of renewable energy keeps increasing the need for gas turbines, and they operate flexibly, of course, with other renewables now.

In operating in both peaking and baseload applications, our proprietary silencer technology remains a key differentiator that we can do that noise attenuation of peaking load turbines and get a very, very durable product throughout that type of operating functionality. Look forward to hopefully end of the conflicts in the Middle East and that market returning to normal for us.

Just on EGL Clean Air. In line with the expectations that we had, revenue roughly flat year on year.

Gross margin remained strong at 36%, which I guess demonstrates the technologies that we have and how they're well placed within the market. Much better results in the second half, EBITDA increasing by 84% compared to the first half.

We secured a major contract with Pensana that was around $9 million for the scrubbing of gases from a rare earths offtake system that's being built in Angola. As I mentioned earlier, Kirill Linton appointed General Manager of TAPC after a long time with the group as Head of Engineering and has brought a very, very strong discipline into that business, which has been terrific to see.

Clean Air is still got a very good reputation, the air pollution control market, process optimization, and compliance solutions. As Gareth mentioned, we did take an impairment charge against Airtight, just writing down the goodwill as part of that acquisition.

As Gareth mentioned, it is subject to legal proceedings, I won't say too much, but there's contingent asset gone into the notes of the accounts. We're very confident that that will be a successful litigation process for us, and hopefully it'll be a good return of funds to the business once that's completed.

I guess a really important part is we completed a major dust control system within the grain sector. It was the project inherited from the Airtight acquisition, and it was largely delayed as we had to review the complexities and make sure that we could deliver what the client asked for.

It's ended up being an absolutely fantastic project, great praise from the client about how we brought it together and made it work, the professionalism, the tech capability that we showed through that. I'd expect this will lead to a significant amount of work going forward now in the grain sector.

What was difficult to deal with from the acquisition, I suspect will be a long-term benefit to our shareholders from here. I'll just talk to the outlook quickly now.

We'd expect EBITDA to increase on a prior comparable period. You'll, of course, hopefully see growth with improved margins back within the energy business now that it's obviously trading in a more normal fashion.

We'll continue to grow that one EGL culture to sell multiple services to service lines across the customer group. It's quite common now that we're doing the boilers, the pollution control systems, and the combustion systems for larger industrial clients.

That strategy of really bringing all of our business units to the one client has continued to be a very good driver of our revenue growth. As Gareth mentioned, 55% of our revenue is now recurring, at 73, 74% within that energy business.

It's making us a much stronger and more reliable earnings stream over time. We'll continue to focus on that.

EGL Energy has had a strong start to the year with boiler sales, and as I mentioned, should see improved EBITDA margins. EGL Waste Services, as I mentioned, certainly the PFAS treatment plant sales are gaining traction.

We've got a couple away in recent months, and hopefully opening up that international markets will drive strong sales growth from here. Baltec, as I mentioned, the macro outlook is very strong, but a little bit of uncertainty around timing with certain events around the world.

We should see growth again in Air with that major rare earths contract win that we've had. Looking forward to a better FY 2027.

Obviously, FY 2026 was pretty rough, and I guess as a management team we didn't feel like we could take a trick. We've worked extremely hard to strengthen up that management team and to make sure that the business continues to perform as best as we can into the future.

Moderator, I'm happy to hand over to you and respond to some questions.

I think it's been a really interesting journey over the last 12 months, and especially having that simulation plant which clearly gave us an indication of just how robust the technology is, how flexible it could be over various wastestreams, and the modularity of it to be able to go up and down in volumes and different wastestreams that we're treating, really just using the same brains, but different material handlings for those different type of wastestream technologies. In terms of that global market development strategy, as I mentioned, Paul was in Europe, I'll be corrected, but in April, May talking about technology.

He was in the US in the later part of July, early part of August, we're developing those strategies right now. In fact, we've got meetings on it next week as soon as the results are done.

The most efficient way to monetize the technology, well, I think that's underway now. We've just sold a couple of plants.

We've already got a couple of plants in and running. The ability now to deal with those more diverse wastestreams has opened up a bigger addressable market.

I'd expect you'll start to see growth within that business and increase sales globally in the near term.

It's fairly difficult question to answer. In terms of the data center pipeline, obviously we see RFQs up to 2, 3 years in advance, because building turbines is not an overnight process.

At the moment, and I'm just going off the top of my head, we'd have 3 or 4 data centers in the US, 1 in New Zealand from memory, and another 1 in Australia. There's probably about 5 or 6 that were looking at turbines behind the gate right now for.

Obviously, it's been a rapid move in that market for all these turbines being sucked into the US as AI is really come along and meant that they need an enormous amount more power within those businesses to be able to run the AI. My understanding is that it requires about 7 times more energy to run an AI search than a standard Google search.

That's driven the demand. It's been a very rapidly moving market, but one that obviously we've now engaging in that agency agreement in the Midwest of the US, at the heart of the data centers, would expect will get us heavily involved within that business.

I'm not sure EBITDA FCF, I presume you're talking about free cash flow. We don't provide EBITDA guidance on individual businesses, of course, but the business has got very good margins, it's got very good intellectual property, and what's an interesting macro outlook for us.

I'd expect you'll continue to see that business perform reasonably well into the future, subject to obviously the Middle East being a little bit problematic for us at this point in time.

We've already answered that question.

Do you have another question?

Liquidity position, obviously, no doubt it's got tougher with the bugger-up in ERP and the invoices, etc. At the same time, we're not sitting here today saying we're going to raise capital at the current share price.

Clearly, we're not going to be doing any acquisitions either. We've got a big focus on our working capital at this point in time and making sure that we get the invoicing right and we get the cash flow right.

My recollection is invoicing out of Energy, and Gareth can probably talk to this better than me, has been around record highs in recent months and collections quite strong. We've certainly had a very large focus on that part of the business.

Just while I'm talking about Energy, it's the same sort of question: "ABC acquired revenue is $16 million. Does this imply that absent ABC's acquired revenue, EGL's revenue would have declined?"

No, because ABC was in the prior period for part. My recollection is there was probably, well, round about half of that revenue recognized in the prior year from memory.

No, I don't think I'd have to do the numbers or get Gareth to do the numbers, but, no, there's certainly a large part of it recorded in the prior period. The next question is: "Size of the PFAS plant sold more recently?"

One was a bit bigger than the standard plant, I think it was around 50,000 liters per hour, off the top of my head. The other plant is a totally different configuration, which is working in a soil washing type of facility.

That's an extremely large plant capable of doing many hundreds of thousands of liters per hour. Both bigger than our standard sort of 20,000-liter per hour plant.

Next question is: "Free cash flow and earnings per share something that you consider? I haven't seen it or mentioned in the presentation."

I think if you go to the appendix B, there's a reconciliation of cash there. We certainly do consider earnings per share and free cash flow.

We'll take it on board about future presentation, but something we're clearly focused on. This was an unusual year for us.

Just take away any issues, we implemented the ERP, that cost us several million dollars. We moved sites and consolidated post the acquisition of ABC.

There was a lot of things going on out of our free cash flow that we were doing to develop the business into the future and obviously make sure the business is sustainable. It's something we clearly look at.

Gareth, do you want to talk to the next question about cash flow positive for FY 2027? We're certainly cash flow positive in 2026 from operations point of view, just reinvested into the company, as you'd expect we would.

I'll hand over to you, Gareth.

That's correct. Probably the short answer is that, yes, we were cash flow positive from an operating activities perspective at $2.3 million positive.

That is actually a better result than FY 2025. Obviously, when you take into account some of the considerable spends that occurred, we spent around $2.4 million on the ERP and around just under $1 million on the relocation.

Those two, which positioned the company well for future growth, but were cash flow negative during the year. They did have an impact.

Coming back to Jason's earlier point, yeah, we've seen quite strong cash collections over the last two months from our Energy business, which is not unusual at this time of year, but it is pleasing to see that July has been so strong.

The next question, I think I'll scroll down. "Sales growth for FY 2027 for Energy, given energy is traded as expected as FY 2025's EBITDA margin of 14%, reasonable expectation?"

I'd have to do the blended margins between Advanced Boilers and TS as a comparison to 2025, where you only had part of Advanced Boilers in there. In broad answer to your question, we'd expect sales growth again in FY 2027.

For each boiler we put into the market, we're then doing service level agreements for the next 5 years. Boiler sales have been, very strong, as I mentioned earlier, already this financial year.

That should lead to underlying growth. I'd certainly expect margin improve.

I just can't reconcile off the top of my head the blended margins of the two businesses, but I'm happy to take that on notice and come back to you. The next one: "More recent plant sales also have recurring income components?"

I presume that's referring to PFAS. Yes, the answer is yes.

We have a maintenance charge that's per liter or kilo depending on the product that we're processing. Each one of those plants we sell come with a recurring income stream once they're commissioned up and running online.

That's certainly is true in the case. "PFAS plants sold, how many do you forecast to sell for this year?"

I'd love to forecast 100. PFAS plant sales, we've got a few in operation now.

We got another two into fabrication. I think by March this year, we'd have four in full operation and commissioned, off the top of my head.

We'd certainly forecast or hopefully sell another couple of plants on top of that during this period as well. It's a difficult one to forecast, not because we don't have very, very high confidence in our technology and how we can see economic solutions for our clients, but you also have regulators involved in this part of the market, and that obviously can be an issue around timing.

I think we're starting to get accepted now by regulators that the technology is extremely effective. Paul, have you got any comments around that?

You're close to that.

Yeah. No, absolutely agree, Jason.

I think the water authorities is certainly really taking that on board now to eliminate the pollution of their sewage treatment plants, they're certainly looking at it upstream now to be able to mitigate their risk that they've got within the sewage treatment plants. They're certainly the key drivers at this funny time, that's across Australia and also the recent trip to the US.

It's the same over there as well. Great.

Thanks, Paul. The next one: "Biggest profit drivers in EGL for the next 2 to 3 years?"

As we just mentioned, we'd expect the PFAS side of the business will continue to grow, and you'd expect to see a return to normal earnings within that Energy business and improved margins. As I said, that business now, the reality is we've got the two key leading brands in Australia between Maxitherm boilers and John Thompson boilers.

We've got the two leading brands, we're the biggest in the market, we're the only national 24/7 company. We're very attractive to the large players within the food and beverage sector in Australia that we can do national agreements with them, I'd certainly expect that to continue to grow.

"Slowdown in Baltec, Australia second half?" Not a slowdown, I wouldn't agree with that statement.

If you go back to FY 2025, we had the enormous Pelican Point job that we did in Australia. As we spoke to the market about then, that was a rare job where we agreed to do the installation supervision as well as supply, which we generally don't do, but we did it purely on a cost-plus basis, we didn't have risk.

I won't be able to get the exact numbers right, but that job was $16 or $17 million. Gareth might be able to help me, a good chunk of that, probably $6, $7 million, was overseeing the installation and that fell within that FY 2025 period.

There's no slowdown in Australia. We're actually quoting a significant amount of jobs.

Now I'm going to say there's 3 or 4 within Australia, a lot of them retrofitting silencers, a couple of upgrades, and a few new larger plants as well. We're just delivering one into Kwinana in Perth at the moment, not a slowdown, just an unusual business mix in FY 2025.

I'd expect that it's just business as usual in Australia. "How we should think of a normal half?

Was there a large contract which means next half—" I'm not sure exactly which half you're referring to. Obviously Baltec, you're doing larger jobs, jobs on average probably $2 to $3 million Aussie, now up to $3, $4 million US.

The timing of those jobs does obviously vary from half to half. At the same time, if you're doing 10 to 12 a year, you'd expect a portfolio approach would sort of balance that out.

"So large contract means next half will be slower again?" No, I don't.

"Americas, and in Americas, given strong second half, everything in order?" Look, I'm not exactly sure how to answer that question, but we've got a good tender pipeline, as mentioned, obviously affected by the Middle East for that part of our business at the moment.

Outside of that, it's very much business as usual, but it will just be lumpy from half to half. Gareth, I'll let you handle next one: "ERP fully employed now?"

Yes. The short answer is, yes, the ERP is being fully utilized.

We've got these reports out using the new ERP system, so that's a positive sign that it is working as it should. We're still working on getting the efficiency out of it, like any new, large ERP installation.

There's a lot of functionality there that we haven't turned on yet and some functionality we probably need to turn off to get the most efficiency out of the system as we possibly can and would like to see. There's still some work that is going to be ongoing.

In terms of day-to-day operations, yeah, there's no issues with data being processed as we speak.

Thanks, Gareth. "So these two delayed Middle East Baltec projects now transition into installation revenue recognition phase, deferred $1.5 million?"

Right. We don't, as I mentioned earlier, we don't do the installation, there's only one job in Australia that we do the installation.

It's a bit complicated, but our role really ends at the port where we fabricate in Vietnam. Since COVID, 3, 4 years ago, we don't even take responsibility for the transport.

We leave that up to our client as well because of the variability and the cost to recoup through that. Obviously part of our revenue recognition, getting paid, is that when it arrives at the client's site and there's a payment when it's commissioned up and functioning as it should do.

The issue is really not around the installation and it's just that revenue recognition based on where the project's at and then when we get paid for the finality of that project. As I mentioned, there was two significant projects into the Middle East, which both suffered significant delays, we can't get the commissioning sort of side of things finalized and those payments.

Then there was another one, which was I can't remember exactly where it was going to, but we had to get acoustic liners from Europe to Vietnam and we couldn't get through the Suez Canal with commercial vessels, because they wouldn't insure commercial vessels through the Suez. We ended up having to go around Africa to get that to Vietnam and that slowed us down by six or eight weeks, which deferred a big chunk of that revenue on that project because we couldn't complete fabrication in time with our expectations.

I hope that's answered that. Oh, sorry: "Have you safeguarded against similar logistics risk in the future?"

Obviously, we can't safeguard against that. As I said, we're largely done export in Vietnam, so that was dealt with many years ago that we're not responsible for transport.

Can we control getting stuff into the Straits of Hormuz? No, we can't.

The chance of us having two jobs in the same half delivered to the Middle East, I suspect, would be fairly low, especially one into Iraq. That's what happened.

There's no other way we can mitigate that risk. We're off-risk on that.

We don't do the transport, we're export, it just means that we don't get the timing on those last couple of payments as we would have expected within the business. "Synergies amongst the business, are they completely standalone or separate?"

No, that's a good question. Synergies within the business: so if you look at what Waste does, the waste sector in Australia is about $18 billion sector per annum, and we've got very, very common clients across the business units through there.

We try and approach those clients on a whole EGL basis where we could do their dust extraction systems, and if you just talk about pure waste facility, we can do the dust extraction systems, we can do their odor control systems, we can do dust suppression with our dry fogging systems. If they've got any waste coming in that needs sterilization, we can do the boilers and autoclaves for them.

Through obviously EGL Waste, we can do the T-MAX separation. There really is a lot of synergies through those businesses.

We'd expect going forward, as we look more to waste-to-energy, that Baltec will also get more and more involved in that waste-to-energy side of the business. The answer to the second part of that question is: "Could we divest a business without affecting the remaining business?"

The answer is 100%. The businesses largely operate on a standalone basis, albeit, as I mentioned, Waste uses their client base to drive sales in all the other particular business units.

Baltec could be divested without impacting it. I suspect so could Energy.

No, I think the answer to that is we could divest without too many issues there. I've got an enormous amount of questions.

I'm trying to get through them as fast as I can.

Shall I jump in on the prior year one here?

Go

ahead. Prior year only had 3 months of ABC revenue.

Doesn't that suggest a sizable decline in EGL Energy revenue, absent the ABC acquisition? Just looking at the numbers, if you exclude ABC out, they had about $4 million of revenue, just low $4 millions in the prior year.

That suggests that the underlying EGL business, the historic EGL business, was relatively flat year on year. There wasn't a sizable decline, there was a slight decline.

The second part of the question was: "Is this decline driven primarily by project or service revenue?" It was really around the project revenue from that side, and we believe that's purely a timing.

We've seen very strong sales to start off FY 2027 in that energy space in all of the energy businesses at this point in time.

The ERP causing disruption to that business.

Yep. "So

ERP rollout difficulties related to EGL or the SI provider?" I'm not sure exactly what SI stands for, but Oracle NetSuite's the system that we implemented.

We had a third party who's specific function in life is to do ERP implementations of Oracle NetSuite. If you listen to all three of us, I'm sure all three of us would say the others got their own role to play in this.

I think broad terms, we're very disappointed with Oracle NetSuite. I think during the process they, and Gareth will know better than me, I think they made 15% of their staff globally redundant.

We found that the response out of Oracle NetSuite wasn't particularly strong and we're quite disappointed in that. The service provider that did the implementation process for us, I'll just say very simply, we sacked them during the process and actually completed it ourselves.

That's how disappointed we were in the capabilities they brought to the business. Do we have to take some responsibility for it?

Absolutely, we have to take some responsibility for it. You don't want to make excuses, but ERP implementations obviously notorious for how they go wrong within businesses.

We thought we'd tested, reviewed, and audited processes extremely strongly. The ERP went live the first morning very well.

We had an invoice out before 8:00 on the first morning we went live. We're confident that we'd done all that's required.

The boring part, I guess, that's our responsibility, is the system was complicated. I'll get this wrong, but just for want of a better description, on the field services, the tablets that our service technician takes out, Oracle NetSuite standard field services it comes out with about 20, 24 selections on the page.

Rather than reducing all that option only on the page is what the service techs could use as a drop-down and select whatever was going on, when we probably only needed six or seven of those functionalities, we rolled it out as standard. That certainly led to issues within the business that led to incorrect data entry into the system.

Certainly we could have been better in what we rolled out in terms of when that went out into the field to make it less complicated for our service techs. We had issues with being in boiler rooms, of course, and being in a difficult work environment where this would normally be rolled out in the majority of businesses by a long way.

There was some data migration that didn't come across as smoothly as it should have, which you'd clearly say our service provider was in charge of that data migration. There I guess part on everyone and we make no excuses for anything that we should have done better, which is probably more around making it less confusing, I guess, for the amount of service technicians we had to try and roll it out for in one one go.

"So manufacturing PFAS plants in-house seems like an inefficient way to address global market." No, I'd do agree with that.

Manufacturing the PFAS plants in-house is done for the Australian market and obviously the control panels that have got all our logics and the brains within them, we keep in-house so that no one can get hold of our IP. If, by way of example, we're doing a PFAS plant into the US, then your point is correct.

That would be manufactured in the US, the tanks and the structurals. We're not shipping air overseas and obviously it's got to be wired to those different standards as well.

When it is going to foreign markets, there would be local input into that. Paul, have you got further comments?

No, absolutely agree, Jason. The key component that we would remain control over is the IP.

Simply the manufacturing, pipework, control panels, and electrics to ensure that it meets that local market would be done in that particular country, but we would maintain that IP and control outside, didn't get out.

Yep. The final part of that question was: "Are you exploring foreign partners and royalty streams?"

Again, Paul, you can talk to that one.

Absolutely. We are looking at potential agents in different countries to assist us within the rollout and selling of PFAS plants.

Certainly from a local perspective, there's people that are on the ground that do already have those networks. It makes it certainly a lot easier for us to be able to do that.

Yep. Thanks, Paul.

The next one: "ERP impacted revenue EBITDA contributions, is that true?" Certainly that's absolutely true.

The revenue impact of the ERP was we had the invoicing issues within the Energy business in I'm going to say March, April, it was around that timeframe. The EBITDA contribution impact was some of the issues we had with the ERP was getting costs on the job of both labor and parts.

Where parts were going onto jobs within that Energy business, one of the big issues we had with the ERP in that timeframe, it was posting parts onto the job either at a value of $0 or $1. We had all the parts obviously loaded into the system at their sale price.

It didn't function correctly in picking that up, and putting that onto invoices. Yes, the answer to that question is ERP clearly impacted revenue and hurt us on EBITDA contribution that second half, especially within the Energy business.

I guess the reason it impacted within the Energy business is, well, I think it's 12,000, 13,000 invoices a year within that business, it's a very high volume business. Within a reasonably short period of time, when you have something like that that's not operating efficiently and effectively, it mounts up in its costs rather quickly.

To have an issue for that period in there with the launch of that system, we then had to go back and review a whole heap of invoices that had gone out, I think it was around 900 in total. We then had to manually review and try and correct and sort the systems out.

It not only had an impact in terms of revenue, but also had an impact of additional costs that came into the business on that front as well. I'm just looking at questions that are being closed out.

Sorry, they're not being marked as complete, so that's a bit hard for me to see what hasn't been answered. I think there's one to go.

"Provide EBITDA guidance for the group for FY 2027, statutory and normalized?" Clearly, we haven't done that.

You don't do forward-looking statements of statutory and normalized at this time. It's very, very early in the year, just the results.

We have come out and said we expect the year to be stronger year on year. Normally, I guess, we'd say, you could take a stronger view.

Clearly, the issues within the Middle East and that Baltec order timing, I think about 20% of our business is through the Middle East, Asia. On that basis, it's a little harder to forecast right now in Baltec than when we'd reasonably normally see.

We still got the pipeline out there, I think at this point in time we're just satisfied to say that we expect EBITDA to increase on the prior comparable period and we'll see an improvement in margins. It looks like the questions have now been closed down.

Gareth or Paul, have you got anything else you'd like to add?

No, don't think so, Jason.

Gareth?

Nope, all good from my perspective.

Operator, I'm happy to hand back to you. I'm not sure if there's any outstanding questions, they appear to all being sort of closed out on the screen now.

Back to you, operator, for any further questions you might have.

Yep. Thanks everyone for your time.

Appreciate you giving us your time again. Hopefully, we look forward for a stronger and better FY 2027.

We'll speak to you soon, and if anyone's got any questions, feel free to send us an email or drop us a note. Thank you everyone, appreciate it.