2026.09.22 | TB | Energy | Trac Energy Expert

Primer • 28 Aug 2026

Companies: GBF DE

Expert Former Senior Executive in Product & Technology

Fatema Patel (Analyst) — Third Bridge Sector Analyst

Agenda

• Over 16 years' experience in the energy space
• Around four years' experience at Trac Energy (left within the last two years)

Introduction

Analyst: Please could you state I agree or I disagree to the following statement. You understand the definition of material non-public information and agree not to disclose any such information, or other information which is confidential, during the Primer Interview today.

Expert: I agree.

Questions

Could you describe what Trac Energy does? What products and services does the company provide?

Expert: It primarily provides inspection services delivered by rope access technicians, typically offshore with a focus on integrity management.

Analyst: What type of assets does Trac generally conduct inspections for?

Expert: It's oil and gas assets primarily.

What is the value proposition of Trac's products and services?

Expert: It really falls into service and cost advantages. [Then], proximity to the customer base, they are right on the heliport for the North Sea customer base. It comes down to availability of personnel and accreditation. That's really what they offer.

What is the full range of industries and business sizes that could use Trac's products or services?

Expert: I think no customer is too small. They will work for fairly small customers, but they will also go up to full-sized oil and gas operator or marine operator.

Analyst: Is the company servicing the small, mid-market or large O&G [oil and gas] companies?

Expert: They will cover small, medium and large oil and gas companies, operating companies.

Analyst: Could Trac cater to any other industry, but it's not necessarily targeting it currently?

Expert: Yes. Chemical, marine, onshore infrastructure, renewable energy. Those are all segments that require that same service mix.

Analyst: Why is Trac Energy yet to cater to companies in the spaces you mentioned?

Expert: I think that they have very much a focus on what's on their doorstep, which traditionally has been oil and gas. There are obviously high barriers to that industry. Once involved, it becomes a lot easier to transition out of oil and gas. Other sectors have totally different price points and risk profile. I think that's held them back.

Could you profile Trac's typical target customers across industries and business sizes?

Expert: Yes. Typical ideal customers will be companies like Harbour Energy, Serica, Ithaca, Shell. Those kinds of businesses. Traditional or new entrant North Sea oil operators.

Analyst: Could you comment on the typical business characteristics of a good ideal customer for Trac, who could use its services?

Expert: An ideal customer profile could be an operating business that's already highly developed, has its own infrastructure and it just essentially hires people with a little bit of service behind them. That would typically be who they want to sell services to. They are not responsible for whole projects, but they are able to supply the technical resource into that business.

Analyst: Could you define a medium- and large-sized organisation for Trac using a quantifiable metric?

Expert: I am not quite sure. The ones I have just listed were, I guess, large. Medium businesses would be companies like FPSO operators and so on.

Analyst: Could you comment on the revenue generated by a medium- and a large-sized customer organisation?

Expert: I would say that the majority of it comes from medium to large businesses, 81-90%.

Analyst: What might be the revenue estimate for a medium-sized business and a large-sized business in the industry?

Expert: A typical contract value in that sector would range between GBP 500,000 per annum at the low end and GBP 3m per annum at the very top end. I don't think it would ever really exceed that level.

Analyst: Might it be correct to say that 91-100% of Trac's revenue comes from the O&G industry?

Expert: I would say that, traditionally, c.100%, particularly if we are talking about the Aberdeen-based business, there are other companies in the group. Aberdeen-based business is very much focused on oil and gas. That's where virtually all of its revenue came from. I think that it has changed a little bit in recent years. You maybe see 81-90% rather than 91-100%. They do operate in renewables. They do operate in other areas but still very much in oil and gas business.

Analyst: What industries apart from O&G and renewables does the Trac operate in? You mentioned 81-90% of the company's revenue comes from O&G and 0-10% comes from renewables.

Expert: I think the marine sector. Vessel repair, that kind of thing.

What are the key regions Trac derives its revenue from?

Expert: Almost exclusively the UK, North Sea. A little bit from Europe, from Germany.

Would you say 81-90% of the company's revenue comes from the UK and 0-10% comes from Germany?

Expert: I would say so, yes.

Analyst: What are the top three revenue-generating regions within the UK for Trac?

Expert: From regions within the UK, Scotland. Almost exclusively Scotland.

What are Trac's core revenue-generating segments? What are the company's revenue-generating services?

Expert: I can't remember what it says on the website now, but certainly in their external marketing materials, it would be split into engineering, inspection, repairs and maintenance, which is one title, and renewables, which is odd because that's obviously a sector, not a service, but that's how they were splitting it.

Analyst: Might inspection be NDT [non-destructive testing] inspection?

Expert: Yes. Inspection would be subdivided into 4-5 sub-segments with different disciplines and techniques. You could [consider] it NDT. It would be fine.

What is the relative size of each core segment in percentage ranges of total revenue? What is the revenue size of engineering?

Expert: It's a guess, obviously, but 0-10%. [Inspection] would be, far and away, the largest. Let's say, 61-70%. Repairs and maintenance, I think, would be 11-20%. Renewables would be 0-10%.

What is a typical revenue model for each core segment? Is it transactional [one-off purchase], recurring [purchase based on subscription or contract] or reoccurring [purchase based on regular demand, which is not bound by contract]? What is the revenue model for engineering?

Expert: In the way they mean it, I think you would have to say that was essentially recurring revenue. [Inspection] is either recurring or reoccurring. I know there's very little done on a fixed fee basis. It's the same fee every year. There normally would be quite a wide variation in what was paid. There will be some revenue from each customer each year, typically. Probably recurring would be best for that. I think repairs and maintenance would be transactional and renewables would be reoccurring.

Analyst: How long are the contracts for engineering and inspection? What is the typical contract length?

Expert: Obviously, information could be outdated. They are very rarely awarded for less than three years. A new contract would be 3-5 years. They do have a publicly good record of keeping hold of customers. In a lifetime contract value, it would be 10-15 years. It can last a long time. Whether anybody in oil and gas has got 10-15 years left on a contract is a moot point, but yes.

Analyst: How often do customers pay?

Expert: It would typically be monthly for those recurring models. Typically, customers will be billed monthly. That's pretty much an industry norm.

Analyst: What is the payment or contract price actually calculated on?

Expert: It always derives from resource hours or some variation of resource hours. Even if we are talking about recurring fixed fees, they are still derived from the number of resource hours required. For transactional or recurring, the exact value will be driven by how much resource has been assigned for recurring models. That would be the basis point underneath it, but it would be some sort of a fixed service price.

Analyst: Could you elaborate on the reoccurring revenue model for renewables?

Expert: This is an area I am sort of familiar with. Typically, across the sector, these would typically be on frame contracts or lump-sum service contracts. Trac doesn't accept any lump-sum service contracts now. Everything will be on some form of frame agreement with the customer, able to adjust how much work they want each year by changing the call off requirements. That's why it's reoccurring rather than recurring.

Could you provide a use case for each core segment? What does Trac do in engineering for the customers? How do customers come in contact with Trac for engineering? How is the service used and where is it used?

Expert: Usually, for engineering, as far as I understand, it would be, a customer would be driven to them by a lack of capacity inside their own business, either a lack of resource capacity or potentially too low a demand to build something in-house. That's the sort of work that they would do. They provide, for example, some graduate engineers or structural engineers to support a customer on a rolling contract. It would tend to be that kind of engineering work, again, sort of resource-based.

Analyst: What is Trac building for the customers in engineering?

Expert: It's just how they would describe it, but they don't design or build anything. They just provide the resource to work on customer projects.

Analyst: Are the human resources or technicians employees of Trac?

Expert: Yes. They would be.

Analyst: What is a use case for inspection? What do you mean by NDT?

Expert: Non-destructive testing is just simply a way of getting an accurate understanding of the integrity of a material without taking it apart or destroying it. You would essentially run a probe across the surface of material and then be able to gain a clear picture of what's happening underneath the surface. You are looking for fatigue cracking, fatigue-based damage or volumetric defects from manufacturing process.

The use case for North Sea oil and gas inspection would be driven partly by regulation. Obviously, if you have got systems that are containing hydrocarbons or, particularly, if they are under pressure, there's a mandatory inspection regime. That's what would be the main driver for hiring an inspection business to meet regulatory requirements. That would be the same for Trac and any other. Also have drivers like decommissioning and how stable an asset is to take apart and what work is needed to support it. To a lesser extent, you might have best practice-type scheduled inspections, ie, to preserve the life of the asset. That's not as common in the North Sea now, but it's obviously very common in renewables. That would be the main thing that would drive work there.

Analyst: Does Trac Energy have a reporting portal for its customers?

Expert: To transfer reports and so on? I am not sure. I know they did something different in a part of the business. I don't think they do is the honest answer.

Analyst: Is the hardware used for inspection proprietary to Trac or does the company licence the hardware off the shelf from OEMs?

Expert: A normal model would be for that equipment to be supplied with a technician and it would be charged. It would have a separate chargeable value. Typically, they would own the equipment. That's a pretty standard model, I think.

Analyst: What is a use case for repairs and maintenance?

Expert: In simple terms, this would be fixing things that inspection throws up. Damage that's comes to light under inspection regime or during something like a marine classification survey on a vessel where they have like a five-years survey and they realise there's damage to a hull or whatever. That would create a use case for repair and maintenance services. For companies that are 17020-accredited, which they are, they need to be able to demonstrate that they are not actually using their inspection as a wedge for their repair and maintenance activity. That's why it's split out in a different service line.

Analyst: What is a use case for renewables?

Expert: A use case for renewables, I can tell you exactly, generally, is either scheduled inspection driven by a manufacturer or warranty or best practice. These tend to be newer assets and they want them to last a long time or it would be statutory inspection driven by a regulatory need to keep cranes in service, for example, to keep lifts in service, to keep ladders in service, that kind of thing. There would also be periodic support to construction phase activity, which could be much broader or interventions like a vessel collision and so on. Usually, they fall into an annually recurring regime that is a mixture of best practice integrity inspections and statutory must do inspections.

Analyst: Would you call the renewables segment as renewables – repairs and maintenance?

Expert: I would say inspection rather than repairs and maintenance. I always thought that was an odd thing to have three services in an industry. If you are having to classify, that should live in inspection group.

Which of Trac's segments do you anticipate being the fastest growing and potentially driving the largest share of revenue in future?

Expert: That's really difficult to answer now. From looking outside of the business, I would say renewables because it's still a fast-growing sector despite the tailwinds it's seeing now. It requires the same sort of disciplines and services. I don't think, for them, that will be a driver. They have quite publicly said they don't want to go in that direction. Looking beyond that, it is a little bit hard to say which of those. I think, for sure, the growth will come from inspection activity of some sort, but I am not quite sure how it sits with what they are doing now.

Could you specify the industry that best describes Trac's core operations?

Expert: Oil and gas production is the industry they are working or it services oil and gas production.

Analyst: Would you say the company operates in the O&G servicing industry?

Expert: Yes.

What has the AAGR been of the O&G [oil and gas] servicing industry over the past three years?

Expert: For the industry, I am a little out of touch actually with that sector, but it's been notoriously flat. In the UK, it's notoriously flat. Depending on which year you are looking at, it's either slightly contracting or growing 0-5%. It's not a fast-growing area.

What do you think have been the 1-2 key drivers of historical market growth?

Expert: Oil price. Global oil price has been the main driver by far, combined with the UK regulatory and tax regimes and that's been the biggest driver.

Analyst: How have O&G prices impacted the industry?

Expert: If we are talking about services to oil and gas, in simple terms, the more revenue per barrel oil companies are getting, then the more interest they have in maintaining their assets and ensuring there aren't any gaps in operations. I don't think there's anything really more scientific than that. When they get higher price for their product, then they start to look at, a lot of things become economic that aren't under normal circumstances. When the oil price drops, inspection, maintenance, all those kinds of services, they are almost the first thing that gets cut back to the bare minimum. I think it's hard to sort of [explain].

Analyst: Could you elaborate on the regulation that you just mentioned? How is regulation a historical driver for the industry?

Expert: This is not my specialist area at all but where regulations are adapted for North Sea or oil and gas and require, for example, higher level of inspection on older assets, that has a direct impact on driving inspection, maintenance services and the like. It can also have a negative effect as well. For example, operating companies are required to hold greater cash reserves or decommissioning bonds and so on. I would say that's not really my specialist area, but it is something that we used to talk about a lot. We are going to have to do this because the law has changed from A to B and, therefore, we need to do more inspections or you know. It's that kind of thing. It can go in either direction in that respect.

What do you think the industry's AAGR will be over the next three years?

Expert: That is crystal-ball gazing, but it's 0-5% is my bet. It depends. We are obviously sitting here wondering what's going to happen with Rosebank and other assets. 0-5%, I think.

What do you think will be the 1-2 key drivers of future growth or stagnation for the market?

Expert: The energy profits levy in the UK. It's a matter of opinion how much effect that will have, but I think that would drive growth if it was reduced. A change [in the energy profits levy] will change the level of investment in the UK North Sea and that will drive services behind it. Any other change of that type to the tax regime in the UK or the regulatory regime would also have an impact. You could also talk about consenting of new fields, Rosebank and Jackdaw and so on. That will have an impact but not a huge impact, I think.

Analyst: Could you elaborate on the UK profits levy?

Expert: Yes. At the moment, it imposes a windfall-type tax regime on oil and gas operators pegged to the price of oil and of gas, two different factors. It's seen as being excessively onerous and also quite erratic. It makes it hard for companies to continue to invest for the long term in the North Sea. It's being used as a real reason or an excuse for people to exit the North Sea. If it was to be removed, if the levy was to be removed or reduced, then it would theoretically drive some growth and inbound investment, which would in turn drive services.

To what degree do you think the industry is correlated to economic cyclicality? Is it counter-cyclical, very cyclical, somewhat cyclical, somewhat resilient or very resilient?

Expert: It's very cyclical if we are talking about oil economics. It's less tied to national economics. You would have to say it's very cyclical.

Analyst: What is the reason for your answer? How does the industry perform during an economic downturn?

Expert: During a downturn, I can tell you the best way of describing it is in 2014, where we had the last really significant crash in the oil price. Virtually, all non-essential contracts stopped overnight. There was nobody to trade with essentially. There were bare minimum contracts operation. People required to keep a rig operating would be used to meet their statutory requirements. Anything that was best practice or optional would get switched off. It does have a significant collapse in the oil price or oil demand has a very significant impact on companies in that sector.

Based on public information, what impactful technological evolutions or innovations should we anticipate in the industry over the next 3-5 years?

Expert: I am not as well-placed to comment on the oil and gas side. In general, the use of machine learning for advanced processing of inspection results is here now and it's just a question of how ready companies are to adopt it. I think the other big thing is the use of remote and autonomous inspection tools which reduce the need to have people on assets. That's having a pretty significant impact in the renewable sector at the moment. Oil and gas are slightly different because there's a requirement to have people on board the assets anyway. It's not quite such an immediate cost saving, but it is coming. I think that the impact you would see would be a reduction in the number of people needed to do jobs and also potentially the price point of those services might come down. I think that they know the things that are going to happen for sure.

Do you see any downside risks that might materially impact the O&G servicing market's growth over the next 3-5 years?

Expert: The downside risks really relate to further changes of policy and public sentiment. The oil and gas sector are going to be losers of the energy transition. I think the personnel and some of the structures will move across. I think that an acceleration in transition to renewables will harm the oil and gas industry. That's probably the biggest downside risk.

How fragmented do you consider the O&G servicing industry to be? Is the majority of market share captured by 2-5 players or is it a monopoly? Is it fragmented or highly fragmented?

Expert: It's not a monopoly. I think it's between fragmented and 2-5 strong players. It's probably 2-5 strong players in that sector.

How protected is the market? What are the barriers to entry and to scale in it?

Expert: The barriers to entry are actually pretty significant. They relate to accreditation, balance sheet requirements and also access to buyer. It's very hard for a new business to get in and to get into a procurement list. Once you are in it, it's probably not [difficult]. The barriers to scaling will be just, these are old assets and the appetite to buy more services is always going to be self-limiting, but it is quite protected.

Who are Trac's top three direct competitors?

Expert: Can is one. Bilfinger. Then, probably Altrad Group.

Analyst: Might it be correct to assume that none of the competitors mentioned are publicly traded companies?

Expert: No. They are not. They are still private.

What are the market shares for Trac, Can, Bilfinger and Altrad Group in percentage ranges? Alternatively, could you rank the players?

Expert: Of those four, Trac would be the lowest. Can probably be three. Bilfinger, two. Altrad would be the top ranking one. One, I don't know a huge amount about it. Essentially, they have bought a lot of other businesses with a big footprint. They are a pretty big player there.

What might be each player's revenue share in approximations of GBP 100m ranges? What might be Trac's revenue?

Expert: GBP 0-100m. I feel [Can] is probably in the same bracket but upper end of the bracket. Altrad is substantially bigger because of their acquisition activity. I don't know. Probably not much more I can add to that, to be honest.

What might be each player's revenue growth rate in percentage ranges? What might Trac's revenue growth rate?

Expert: Just an opinion, it would be 0-5%. [Can] is more diversified, maybe 6-10%. Then, Altrad is offering it in a completely different way that I am not really familiar, but I would say I don't really know.

What has been each player's growth driver for the last financial year? Has Trac's growth been organic, acquisition-based or mixed?

Expert: That was organic. [Can], I would have said mixed. [Bilfinger] was organic. [Altrad] was acquisition-based.

What might be the average EBITDA margin for the players being discussed in a percentage range?

Expert: It's quite variable actually across those four. If you are talking about EBITDA, it's probably somewhere between 0% and 10%. They don't have high nets. Not sure about Altrad, not so sure about Bilfinger. It is quite complicated, but it's in that range. I feel it's most likely the range.

Would you say each player is above, in line with or below the 0-10% average? Could you start with Trac?

Expert: Really difficult to say but probably aligned with being on the industry. [Can], probably about that. On or above, but I think on industry for Can. For Bilfinger, probably because of the diversification, I would probably say slightly above. Altrad would probably be above, but I am less familiar [with it].

How do you think the players differentiate themselves? What is Bilfinger doing differently compared to Trac? Could you start with Trac?

Expert: It's usually quality and pricing. That tends to be the principal differentiator.

Analyst: Could you elaborate on quality? How does Trac differentiate on the quality of services provided compared to the other players being discussed?

Expert: As you see from the website, they have got a very wide range of accreditations, far more so than they need to operate. That does provide a level of assurance to the customer that what they are buying is going to be over controlled level of quality. Then, the price model for that segment is competitive and they will try and not be beaten on price.

Analyst: How does Can differentiate itself?

Expert: Can made a pretty early commitment to advanced inspection techniques. Therefore, they have got a strong pool of employed personnel with that equipment. That does give them a competitive edge. They also compete on quality, but they also have a stronger specialist service offering.

Analyst: How does Bilfinger differentiate itself?

Expert: Bilfinger have started to tie themselves into being asset operators. It's fairly early development. They work across several industries, as do Can, but they are starting to win contracts now as the O&M manager and the principal contractor, which is different to the other companies in that list.

Analyst: How does Altrad differentiate itself?

Expert: Altrad are everything under one roof model. Essentially, they have bought up various parts of the inspection, maintenance and repair landscape. Essentially, they can do everything from fabrication through to inspection and maintenance. They are a turnkey service provider.

What do you think are customers' top three KPC [key purchasing criteria]? How do they rank the KPC by importance?

Expert: Price is one of them. Quality is the other, so accreditation and so on. Then, resource capacity for those sorts of companies in that sector. Those would be the main procurement criteria.

Analyst: What do you mean by resource capacity?

Expert: Resource capacity is how many offshore technicians they employ and how many they can resource, ie, how many projects can they comfortably run at the same time?

How important do you think price is to customers in the O&G servicing market? Is the service commoditised, somewhat commoditised or not commoditised at all, and why?

Expert: At the general end of it, it's pretty commoditised. I would say it's commoditised. The reason for that is, typically, the work is not done on a fixed price. The operator, the end customer provides all of the infrastructure and resource required to do the job and oversight and management of the job. Essentially, what they are buying is skilled personnel and/or equipment. When you take away all the other attributes that go with it, those things are quite easy to commoditise.

What do you think has been the key driver of Trac's historical growth?

Expert: I would say contract retention. They have been quite adept at moving from what was once upon a time a very generalist rope access business just doing bits of maintenance, bits of repair, whatever, into more of an integrity services provider. That's given them the accreditations with that, has given them access to a bigger market. They haven't won very many contracts, but the contracts they have won they tend to hold on to, with growth to compound over the years. Going back to previous comments, their growth very much tracks oil price. If the oil price is racking up, then they tend to go up. If it goes down, then they tend to go down.

Analyst: What is helping the company to retain its contracts really well?

Expert: I think they have been good at being close to their customer base in terms of customer service, it's a key feature. I don't know this, but they must be fairly adaptive with pricing and things, given they are operating in a fairly commoditised market. I think, really, it's quality of service and reliability. They are right there literally in the middle of the industry. I think they are convenient. They are really convenient.

How fast do you think the company could grow over the next three years?

Expert: It will grow. I just don't know how much. Not aggressively, so 0-5%, I would think.

What could be some of the most interesting ways to grow Trac, in your opinion? How would you look at improving its growth profile organically if you were running the company?

Expert: I think there are two ways I would do that. The way that I tried to do it, was to create a renewable energy market that quite publicly hasn't been the direction that they wanted to go in, in which case, I would say that if it was me and I had free access, then I would say consolidate that and grow out on that. You have got toe holding in your market that's growing, put more energy and resource into that. Then, I will start to look at the adoption of more modern technology and starting to use that to deliver a faster, more [selective] service to the customers, which would in turn drive some growth. I think that would be the probably the two options I have got really.

Analyst: Would you consider improving its organic growth by further penetration of existing geographies or moving into new geographies?

Expert: I think securing more in the existing geographies is difficult. I think it would be new. If you are just going to grow it, the new verticals, new geographies would be my take on that.

Analyst: What geography and verticals might be the focus?

Expert: I would say, inside the EU, offshore EU would be [the focus] and probably in renewables. They are an international business. There are still areas that have a different view on oil and gas production. Maybe I will look at one of those as well.

How would you look at boosting the company's growth profile by improving its margins?

Expert: That's a really difficult one to answer. I would have a look at organisational efficiency. [That], I think, would be where I would look. Traditionally, in this sector, everything is sort of day rate or hourly rate and things. There's not as much upside to bring from automation, AI and so on, that makes a big difference on fixed price projects. It makes less difference here. I would look at what was going on organisationally, things like that.

Analyst: Would you improve efficiency in any specific parts of the company?

Expert: That would be really hard one for me to comment on because none of that is publicly available.

Analyst: Could you provide your perspective?

Expert: If I was looking at that type of business, I would look at duplications, I will be looking for double-handling overhead. I think also putting in budgeting. These are all pretty standard things.

Analyst: Would you look at better handling strategy?

Expert: Yes, sort of. Looking at structure, I think.

How would you look at improving the company's growth profile through M&A?

Expert: There's a customer base. I and the rest of the industry thought that might be a direction they would go in, still 3-4 years ago when they had, actually not that long ago, a couple of years ago when you had that, you have got quite a strong renewables footprint and still a lot of traditional oil and gas work. Thought that might be quite attractive. I don't know the current position would be, but I would have said that would have made sense for some businesses.

Analyst: What type of company might make sense for M&A?

Expert: I can only really speak from my perspective, but I would have thought it would make sense for a company that wanted to access the footprint. A larger service provider that perhaps have been struggling to access a particular market could use that to leverage access into that market. I thought that might make quite a lot of sense. I don't think that a competitor necessarily in its core market would gain a huge amount that it couldn't gain through normal competition. I don't really know enough about the sort of the drivers for things like private equity and stuff. If you are building an old Altrad-type animal, then they might fit inside that as well. If it was the other way around, if you talk about other companies to buy in, then I would be looking at smaller digital-based businesses with a product that could be applied across the group.

Analyst: Would you look at IT infrastructures? What types of companies could be interesting for M&A in a digital sense?

Expert: I would be looking at people who have developed engineering software or engineering tools that would keep us a little bit ahead of the state of the art. I think it's quite a key risk for that kind of businesses that the demand for number of people on the assets will reduce and therefore hedging that risk by looking at companies that the benefit from it [the root cause of it] might be a suggestion.

Based on publicly announced acquisitions, how would you describe the company's M&A strategy? Has it carried out any M&A?

Expert: No. They haven't. I have never heard of them doing anything like that.

Could it make sense for the company to acquire, merge with or be acquired by any players in or outside the O&G servicing space, in your opinion?

Expert: I would really go back to my previous answer. It would be a way of company that was outside of the sector trying to gain access within it, whether you are talking about oil and gas or renewables. It would be a way to gain decent foothold and you could make an argument for that, for sure.

Analyst: Could you help us with a specific example?

Expert: I would have thought once that companies like OEG that are operating in both the oil and gas and the renewable space. We were losing contracts to them. I suspect that would be that kind of animal. Companies like Altrad as well, that I am not familiar with. Aurora might also be the sort of company that would look at that.

Analyst: What might be the potential synergies between Aurora and Trac?

Expert: They would gain a resource base and a customer base that complemented their existing activities.

Analyst: Are you suggesting Aurora is the one gaining resources by acquiring Trac?

Expert: Yes. It would.

What would you say are the 1-2 biggest risk Trac faces?

Expert: Oil and gas downturn by far outweighs everything else, but also acceleration of technology is also a risk. They are quite traditional business. They and others are quite traditional businesses. Technology innovation would be a risk as well.

Analyst: How O&G downturn and tech acceleration could be a risk?

Expert: None of these sorts of businesses seem to carry huge reserves and, therefore, a significant downturn in oil and gas price means an almost immediate impact on demand, which means an almost immediate impact on headcount and it would inevitably initiate redundancies and the like. That would be an obvious factor to look out.

Is there anything that the market does not properly understand about Trac, in your opinion?

Expert: Again, really hard to answer that properly. That's a family business. That's a matter of public record. To be fair, I think that does come across in the marketing as well. Other companies out there, Can, Bilfinger and things, they have a much more corporate structure. I think that would be the only real misperception.