← 返回

2026.09.29 | TB | Defense | Exail Technologies & Thales Deal

原标题：Exail Technologies – How Does the Thales Deal Unlock New Potential?

#defense

Third Bridge · 2026-09-29

Analyst-led • 11 Sep 2026

Companies: HO FR, EXA FR, BA. GB, SAAB B SE

Lars Sørfang (LS) VP, Sales at Spectra Defense Technologies Inc

Louis Knight (LK) — Third Bridge Sector Analyst

Agenda

Key Insights

Introduction

LK [00:00:05]: Welcome to Third Bridge's Interview entitled Exail Technologies – Could Neoprimes Dominate in the Age of Uncrewed Naval Warfare? My name is Louis Knight, and I will be facilitating today's Interview with Mr Lars Sørfang, who is a former General Manager and Regional Sales Manager for Scandinavia at Exail Technologies. Lars, thank you for joining, and welcome to today's Interview.

Before we begin, please 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 any other information which is confidential, during this Interview.

LS [00:00:39]: I agree.

LK [00:00:42]: Could you begin with your relevant experience at Exail Technologies and Kongsberg Gruppen, as well as your relevant wider background?

LS [00:00:56]: Yes. I started my career as an Army officer in the Norwegian Army and I spent about 10 years there. I transitioned into the defence industry via Kongsberg, where I worked 10 years, mainly with NASAMS air defence system and remote weapon station turrets and the main focus was North America. Then I transitioned over to Teledyne Flir and was part of the acquisition of Flir becoming Teledyne Flir, working on drones, UGVs and then I transitioned over to Exail as a General Manager for the Scandinavian office. I established office in Norway. Then I run that for about two years, and now I'm the Vice President of Spectra Defense Technologies in sales.

Questions

00:01:42] What are your overarching thoughts on Thales' July 2026-announced decision to fully acquire Exail Technologies?

LS [00:01:53]: I think it's an interesting choice. I didn't think Exail was up for grabs in the market, so to speak. I think it's interesting. I think their technology and products will fit well into Thales' product portfolio. Yes, it's interesting both for them and for Thales.

LK [00:02:16]: What would you say are the top three synergies of this combination, whether that be specific technology, cross-selling into certain end markets or cost and operational synergies?

LS [00:02:33]: I think you can unite a couple of products. I mean, Exail and Thales has been competing in the past. I think by uniting their technology that you can make a more disruptive technology that could benefit in the end, the warfighter. I think it's quite interesting to see. I think especially on the inertial side, it's going to be strengthening the product portfolio for Thales' side.

00:03:04] What do you think could be the key synergies achieved from Thales and Exail combining technologies, including deep-sea anti-submarine warfare, drone swarms, ocean surveillance, sonobuoy acoustic platforms, mine warfare and GNSS-denied [global navigation satellite system-denied] environments with FOG [fibre-optic gyroscope] technology?

LS [00:03:37]: I think especially with Exail's track record, both on unmanned surface vessel with the DriX and of course, there are a wide range of inertial navigation units. I think combining the capability to do war fighting both on naval side, but also on the land side is going to be quite interesting. Like I said, I never worked for Thales, so I don't know their products as well as I know Exail's. I think with the capability and how Exail has delivered products in the past, that's going to be strengthening their capability. I mean, just for submarine warfare, you have the inertial navigation systems, making you able to operate in a very long time undersea without any drift in the system. Of course, you have the full fleet of mine countermeasure systems, which is very interesting, and you can see now by the Belgium and the Dutch Navy and the programme that they're doing there. They have a wide range of product portfolio. I think it's going to be quite interesting. Another thing Exail has been focusing on at least during my time there was the autonomy solution, and they have quite good software in regards to running autonomous solutions and vessels. That's going to be very interesting.

00:05:04] How do you think the technology combination will transform Exail and Thales from platform vendors to prime contractors, especially for the uncrewed naval systems?

LS [00:05:17]: That depends. I don't have a clear-cut answer on that. I think having more tools in your toolbox makes you able to take a step up. I think combining both Exail and Thales workbox, meaning that you can take on more responsibility and provide more technology. I think those two forces combined can deliver a lot of capability. Usually, you're challenged by what the customer wants and what they have, meaning that you need to implement a lot of GFEs or government-furnished equipment. Now, with the big product ratio that they have now, I think that it's going to be easier for them to take on even bigger tasks.

00:06:06] Could you give an example of a step-up change where Exail may have been working on a project for country X worth Y million in platform solutions, and explain what size procurement programme it could step into from the technology combination?

LS [00:06:36]: I think they definitely step up in the big league. I think they now are ready to go head-to-head with companies like Saab and BAE Systems, Kongsberg. Of course, Thales has a very good track record. I think the step-up basically comes from Exail's side being able to take on bigger projects. They will now have a bigger organisation and a bigger overhead in management and things like that. I think the step-up is going to be from Exail's side. I think for product portfolio, it's going to be the step-up for Thales.

LK [00:07:15]: Essentially, do you think Exail under Thales could compete with the biggest primes on the biggest programmes in Europe?

LS [00:07:30]: Yes, absolutely.

LK [00:07:32]: What was your key focus in technology? Was it the DriX series?

LS [00:07:39]: I had the whole product portfolio. Of course, I worked with the DriX and trying to get that into Scandinavia. The day-to-day business was inertial navigation systems, both on the civilian and on the military market.

00:08:02] How quickly do you think Thales can package Exail's DriX platforms and underwater UMIS [unmanned mine countermeasures integrated system] platforms into existing prime contractor naval packages?

LS [00:08:18]: I think that can go quite fast. The DriX is already a TRL 9, meaning that it's already being deployed and supported by customers. It's basically on how they're going to fit it into their digital architecture or their infrastructure. Because it needs to be not just another product in your portfolio, it needs to be part of the system. They're probably going to need some transition there to make it work seamlessly. I think that's going to be quite fast. Exail is quite agile when it comes to new development. I think they're going to do that quite fast.

00:09:00] Could you elaborate on what DriX is and what the UMIS platforms are? What are their functions? Why are they so important today?

LS [00:09:17]: Yes. At least this is just my understanding. It depends on how the customer wants to utilise the system. Of course, the DriX is an unmanned surface vessel, meaning that it's able to do seabed mapping, monitoring, search for submarines. I know some nations have used it as an early warning and early detection in front of large hangar ships and big military operations. Some use it for oil inspection to watch the pipelines and monitor and some other use it just for seabed mapping, meaning taking pictures and scanning the sea bottom. It depends on how you want to utilise the system. What the DriX is capable of is that you can use the sensor gondola underneath and replace the sensor there, meaning that you can have a quite interesting way of packaging it, so you can get the data that you need.

LK [00:10:22]: To what extent can DriX monitor for mine detection and underwater infrastructure interference?

LS [00:10:34]: With the gondola, you're able to go quite deep, meaning that you have less pollution in the way you are mapping. Yes, it's a quite capable system. Of course, it can be tangled in with other vessels that can be utilised, meaning to detect mines. If you detect it with the DriX, then you can deploy the ROV drones in order to dismantle the mine or to blow it up.

00:11:15] Is DriX the most efficient way to detect mines? With the US mine warfare initiatives and Russian interference on critical underwater infrastructure around telecom and gas in the North Sea, would this be a core application area for this technology, or would there be a more suitable technology?

LS [00:11:47]: No, I think it would be very suitable for that and also for the wind farms standing in the oceans. It's quite capable of all the tasks that you're actually asking about, but it also have the possibility to detect items on the sea bottom, meaning, for instance, submarines or other objects that you don't want to have in your area of operation.

00:12:15] How would DriX's technology compare to Helsing's SG-1 and Lura torpedo-like glider drones? Do they perform the same function as DriX?

LS [00:12:30]: Probably, I haven't worked with those systems. I can't state anything obvious about them. Of course, they are in the same product range. At least what I know from Exail side is that it's so agile and that you can do such… Have it very specific to mission systems. I think that being capable of just replacing the sensors in the gondola and then you can have it out in operation. I think that's one of the key things on how to utilise the system.

00:13:05] Does DriX need a mother ship? Can it be deployed and operate independently in the North Sea?

LS [00:13:15]: It can do both. You can have it fully autonomous. Of course, you need to monitor its progress, but you can do both.

00:13:25] What is the operational range and endurance of DriX?

LS [00:13:30]: That's a question of how long is the rope because it depends on the sea state that you're operating in, depends on the sensors you have in the gondola, depends on are you planning to resupply at any point. Two years ago, they released the DriX Ocean 16 [O-16], which is the biggest DriX in the family, which could operate for 30 days without any refuelling or resupplying because it both has solar panels and batteries and the diesel engine. Those three combined makes it able to operate standalone for 30 days. It depends.

00:14:12] What is the typical procurement function? If the Norwegian government wanted to have 24/7 monitoring of its full coastline, would DriX be the best option? How many systems or platforms would it need to do so?

LS [00:14:41]: If we're talking DriX 16, then I would probably say that they need 10 or maybe eight, six in operation and then two in reserve.

LK [00:14:54]: The two in reserve would be refuelled, maintained and then rotated as and when. Is that correct?

LS [00:15:02]: If you need to do some depot-level maintenance or something like that, then you can release another system and then you can take it back and fix it up.

00:15:13] Is it a typical procurement request from governments such as Norway and the UK to want 24/7 coastline surveillance, or even extending a few kilometres out to monitor offshore wind farms and telecom and gas infrastructure?

LS [00:15:38]: There are seldom requirements that they need 24/7 operation because it takes a toll on the manpower as well. Usually, they want to have a certain set of operation time, meaning that one request is that we need to operate for 30 days and then it ends there because we don't know their set of operation, what they're going to do, and they try not to disclose too much in their RFQs either, meaning that some of the parts of the operation needs to stay secret or is sensitive.

00:16:25] Is coastline surveillance completely different from deep-sea anti-submarine warfare and seabed protection, or are they essentially the same?

LS [00:16:35]: It depends because sometimes you have warning systems placed underneath, meaning in harbours and things like that, you can see when things are crossing a certain threshold or an area of operation. I think now with the current situation in Ukraine and with Russia, you need to have an early detection. If you look at a unit like the DriX, you can have that out there in the North Sea, try to detect if there are any movements that you are unable to catch now with your legacy system, meaning radars and aeroplanes and drones. I think combining those technologies with legacy systems, giving you now a better early warning than you had four years ago.

00:17:34] Instead of risking around EUR 2bn to track silent submarines and monitor subsea cables, navies can deploy DriX drones to maintain ocean surveillance using Thales' processing and acoustic sonars merged with Exail's deep-diving AUVs [autonomous underwater vehicles], and they can create a huge acoustic barrier. Is that right?

LS [00:18:08]: Absolutely. I think weakness side is that the drones or the DriX or which platform you select as your USV, it's going to be not able to defend itself out there. Of course, a unit like the DriX is looking downwards, not upwards. If you look at some lessons from Ukraine, then you probably know that an FPV drone can take out the USV without any issues. You need to take it into consideration all the aspects of the operation, and you cannot rely blindly on that if I procure, for example, the DriX, then you will be safe. You need to have other conventional systems connected in if you want to do a secure operation.

00:19:01] How does one defend the AUV?

LS [00:19:05]: With counter-UIS system.

LK [00:19:11]: From a frigate or from an unmanned surface vessel?

LS [00:19:17]: You can use unmanned surface vessels that's combined with both effectors and sensors.

00:19:26] What type of effectors and sensors do the unmanned surface vessels typically use? Are they hard or soft kill?

LS [00:19:32]: It's hard kill. I know, for instance, that Maritime Robotics have developed one platform that is unmanned, which has a radar and 12.5 weapon system on top with disperse ammunition, so it can actually take out drones when it's detected. Yes, the technology is there. It just depends on how you situate the operation.

00:20:04] To what extent do you think Thales and Exail can improve win rates on the multi-billion-euro naval programmes in this area? What size order intake do you think they will see in the near term?

LS [00:20:26]: It depends on which programmes that are available. I cannot give any answer to that. I think they are ready to now take on more and bigger projects. Of course, it's always about what the customer needs and wants and what the amount of money they are able to spend on those different programmes.

00:20:53] What are the opportunities for uncrewed naval surveillance and mine countermeasures technology for Thales and Exail? What demand might emerge from the Baltics and NATO European countries, including Finland, Sweden, Bulgaria, Romania and Greece in the next 3-5 years? To what extent do they have this equipment and the capabilities so far? What size order intake do you think we might see?

LS [00:21:36]: It depends. It's usually a long cycle in order to procure this type of assets. It depends. I mean, there are a lot of movement in that area because to be blunt, they are afraid of what Russia is doing on the sea side with their maritime operations. Of course, a couple of years ago, where everyone was buying main battle tanks and prepared for Article 5 warfare, but now it's more of a hybrid warfare and you need to select the right capability for your country and the challenges that you are facing. Of course, if you take Finland, for instance, they have a large border towards Russia. They need to do a lot of land surveillance and to monitor their borders. Of course, they also have the sea side. I know at least for Sweden, Norway and Denmark, they are focusing a lot on their now naval borders, and they need to maintain that. Norway now is into that frigate programme. They're going to down-select the next frigate, but they're also looking for a multi-role vessel that they can fit with different mission profiles. DriX would fit very good into the new mission role vessel being able to do multiple missions with different profiles. Of course, that are in the EUR 1bn range. I mean, buying frigates are costly. Yes, I think it just depends on the requirements, but the funding is there.

00:23:35] Could you discuss the key opportunities? There is early detection, mine warfare, robotic mine defusing and complex inertial navigation for vessels, where Exail and Thales have great technology, especially in GNSS-denied environments with FOG technology. Then there are ancillary opportunities such as atomic clocks, quantum gravity meters and quantum sensing. Would you agree with that? Is there anything else to add?

LS [00:24:28]: No, I think I would agree to that. I mean, we're talking a lot about the mine countermeasures on the seabed. Are we really meeting too much mines in 2026? Is that one of the biggest threats? Is it early detection of any movement, for instance, foreign submarines that you don't want in your waters? If you clock it down a couple of years ago, everyone was talking about UGVs and that they needed IED UGVs because that was the biggest threat with Iraq and Afghanistan as their theatre. Now, less are talking about UGVs. I don't think there are too many programmes ongoing now about buying UGVs. It's a change. I think now the focus more is on early detection and then being able to operate and do the correct measures when you detect something. Of course, I think the new battlefield today is in GNSS-denied environment, which Ukraine is a good example of. We need to adapt our technology into the future battle space.

LK [00:25:53]: Mine warfare represents one of the strongest use cases, with autonomous boats costing less than EUR 8m each vs tens of millions of euros for traditional crewed minesweepers or boats. The UK Navy would need around 30 autonomous boats to replace the nine existing minesweepers, with each carrying 2-3 underwater drones. Do you agree with these rough numbers?

LS [00:26:21]: Yes, probably.

00:26:28] How do you estimate the rest of NATO European countries compared with the UK's mine warfare?

LS [00:26:43]: It's hard to do a rough estimate. It's a couple of years now since I worked mainly with the maritime picture. Of course, everyone is doing either a mid-life upgrade or they're procuring new frigates to meet the new threats. I think the numbers you're saying is quite equal to what the rest of Europe is looking at as well. Of course, now we can also see that the European resilience also allows countries to collaborate more in their defence spending. One example there is that Finland and Norway procured the K9 from Hanwha as their howitzer, and they selected the same K9 to both release the logistic footprint, but also being able to do joint operations.

00:27:43] What would you say is the TAM for DriX early detection systems in NATO European countries? How many systems do you think Europe needs per year overall, not just from Exail specifically?

LS [00:28:06]: Each country, I would probably say in the range of 30-60 a year for Europe.

00:28:20] How long do you think the demand would be sustained before the fleet is built up and reaches a stable replacement cycle?

LS [00:28:36]: Probably 5-10 years, I would guess, because it's always a long cycle and then you need to get the systems up and running, you need to do training. I would say 6-7 years, yes.

00:28:54] What market share do you think Exail would capture vs Saab, BAE Systems or others?

LS [00:29:04]: Probably 25-30%, I would guess.

LK [00:29:10]: Apart from these three players, there's also Kongsberg.

LS [00:29:17]: Kongsberg have unmanned surface vessels, but they have underwater drones. It depends how we're splitting the product portfolio. Is it unmanned surface vessels or is it below?

LK [00:29:34]: What level of market share do you think will be captured by these Neoprimes, such as Quantum Systems, Helsing and Anduril?

LS [00:29:45]: I think they would get a quite large portion of that. I would split probably 50%, I would guess.

LK [00:30:02]: Then Saab, BAE and Exail will be capturing the rest of the 50%, with Exail capturing relatively more than Saab and BAE?

LS [00:30:13]: Yes. I think their product portfolio is a better fit. Yes, I think they will be grasping more of the market.

00:30:20] Why do you think Exail has a better product portfolio than Saab or BAE Systems regarding DriX and early detection?

LS [00:30:47]: I think they are longer in their technology readiness level. I think the vessel that they have selected being so agile and holistic, meaning that you can put whatever sensor you want into the system makes it quite advantageable for the future customers. I think those combined will provide them with wins in this market.

00:31:17] What makes Exail's technology superior in hardware, data, range and speed compared with Saab or BAE?

LS [00:31:35]: As I said, I don't know their product portfolio as well as with Exail, but I delivered a couple of bids on behalf of Exail, and I know that usually, when you have a TRL 9 product and an unknown customer releases their RFQ, you probably hit about 75% of the requirements and then you need to make some adjustments if you want to achieve as much as possible. My experience with the DriX and going into bid is that we have been on around 90% hit on the requirements, meaning that the product is requested as is.

00:32:32] What YoY sales growth would you expect for naval robotics and autonomous drones in Europe?

LS [00:32:55]: It would probably be around 15-20%, I would estimate.

00:33:03] What are your thoughts on Atlas Elektronik as a competitor in autonomous systems?

LS [00:33:17]: They have a good product range to my knowledge, but I can't provide any specifics regarding that. I have cooperated with them in a project in the past, and they came for us very serious and had a very good product, but I don't know their product range.

00:33:40] Why do you think Helsing, Quantum Systems, Anduril and Shield AI would be winning autonomous surveillance programmes or bids over Exail?

LS [00:33:56]: Those companies that you mentioned, and this is just my impression, but they have been hitting the market with disruptive technology. It's something new, and it's very interesting, especially for Shield AI with their Hivemind and being able to build up new software and new product types like that is astonishing, and we need that in order to push the boundaries for technology. I think they're making waves because they have disruptive technology and groundbreaking technology, and it's something that like a big organisation like Saab or BAE usually, they do R&D and development, but they usually need more time in order to turn around to find new disruptive technology. Then you have the start-up and new companies coming up where they have shorter decision-making and deciding that, "Okay, let's go for it," and then they build it with funding, of course. That's because it's new, it's fancy and flashy and it works, that makes it interesting for the customer.

00:35:11] What makes Neoprimes' autonomous drone technology outperform Exail's? Is it more related to the large language model integration in data management, analysis and decision-making?

LS [00:35:36]: I think if you have a system like the DriX, you need to make it a complete solution, meaning it needs to be a standalone system so you can operate it, but it also needs to be able to combine with higher echelon units, making it a part of the battlefield decision-making system. I think having an open architecture, so you can export the data that you have in your system being it able to provide you with enough data to make good decisions in the battlefield. That is the key requirements and Exail's architecture are open in that way, meaning that you can use it as a supportive information when you are making decisions, and I think that's one of the key features.

00:36:28] You said the technology from Helsing, Quantum, Anduril or Shield AI is flashy and revolutionary. What makes it so much better than Exail?

LS [00:36:41]: I wouldn't say that it's better because it's hard to combine those two up against each other. Exail have a track record based on what they have delivered in the past, which makes it a logical and safe choice. Of course, with the disruptive technology with Shield AI and Anduril, they are now also making track records. It depends. It's not an easy yes or no answer to that question. Usually, the customer requires some kind of track record or a programme of record. That's where the big OEMs have that ability to show the track record basically.

00:37:39] How much better is the software from Shield AI, Helsing and Quantum Systems?

LS [00:37:45]: I can't say what's better. From what they're displaying and what their software is capable of doing, that is impressive and disruptive. I'm not a software engineer. I've just seen the demonstrations on the different expos in Europe, and it looks amazing. It's intuitive and it's easy to operate. It's like if I provide you with a tablet of a different brand, then you would probably go back to trying to use your fingers for zooming and scrolling like you have done with, for instance, the Hivemind, it feels like you have used it before when you try to touch the different buttons and where you can find the information.

LK [00:38:45]: The UI is much better.

LS [00:38:48]: Yes.

00:38:52] Neoprimes or the Silicon Valley software defence companies are developing a new layer to connect legacy platforms with AI. One fascinating example is using AI to pilot fighter jets, which Helsing is doing with the Gripen jet from Saab. Is software the most value-generating layer of a system integrator? In 10 years, will Neoprimes such as Helsing, Quantum and Anduril dominate major defence contracts because of their AI integration capabilies? What incremental value does AI bring to autonomous naval surveillance solutions beyond existing capabilities?

LS [00:39:54]: I think AI can be very supportive, and it could also lighten the burden of the operators, meaning that you can have or you can configure it to look for the information that you want to monitor and then it can alert you when it finds it. I think the cognitive load of the operators will be much better. Of course, you want the AI to support you and not to give you a headache to say it's quite easy. Of course, Shield AI and Anduril and everyone now, they are setting the standards for AI in the defence industry, and people will look at them when they are now either trying to make something new or to compete. They have a big advantage by setting the standards going forward. It's going to be quite interesting to see who ends out on top.

LK [00:41:02]: Essentially, the AI-integrated platforms can decipher massive sonar or FOG data that they are receiving and then detect whether that's a mine or a submarine, and what to do about what it finds, taking away some of that cognitive strain on an operator who might have to be trained in analysing the data.

LS [00:41:36]: Absolutely. The AI never get tired, meaning that it can do it continuously. You can switch out the operators every six hours, but the AI will still continue doing the job. Just analysing underwater picture takes hours. With the AI, you can have key points that you wanted to identify and then it can alert the operators. Someone can process that further while the AI keep looking at the new images coming in. Yes, it will lighten the burden and be helpful for our warfighters out there.

00:42:13] Do you think AI software masters will fully displace specialist hardware suppliers such as Exail and Saab in 10 years? Will hardware suppliers' value in the defence industry be demoted? The important part of this system integration and solution is AI software. Do you think that is a risk to hardware suppliers?

LS [00:42:47]: No, I don't think so because you need to have a good platform to run your AI software on, and that needs to be in the specification of what the customer needs. It's okay. If you look at Terminator, they still have the Skynet, but they still need the robots. I think I wouldn't be too afraid for the platform providers to be outnumbered by AI. I hope you understood the reference and the joke, but just to put it into example.

00:43:26] How can Thales leverage its near-monopoly in naval FOG navigation technology to drive synergies in GNSS-denied environments, whereby you use fibre optic gyroscopes in navigation when there are no communications, so a specific sensor is used to light or navigate? What post-merger growth could Thales and Exail achieve?

LS [00:44:12]: I think they're going to probably compare the technology and see if there are things that they can do better or to make advancements on. I think at least now they have a bigger product range, broader product range, meaning that they can fit more requirements in the market, both big and small. Of course, they will still keep on driving the FOG technology into even better. The biggest issue is that you will get drift at some point with your inertial navigation system. They will probably keep pressing that limit on how far you can go before you start to experience any drift.

00:45:01] To what extent do you think the Exail-Thales merger could lock out Safran as a major regional rival in inertial navigation and FOG in Europe?

LS [00:45:24]: Yes and no because it's always about the flavours because some customer likes to work with Safran, some customer likes Thales or Exail, some like Advanced Navigation. It depends. In the end, it all comes down to what set of requirements are you fulfilling and to what price. I think that the market is open. Everyone can compete. I think Exail and Thales now has a bigger product portfolio to compete on bigger range of programmes.

LK [00:46:03]: Where would Safran win or outperform Thales and Exail? Is its advantage mainly tied to the French-aligned procurement cycles and political lobbying rather than superior technology?

LS [00:46:22]: It's hard for me to speculate on that. It depends on who is in government, who is making the decision. I would say the competition is open, and I think it goes down to requirements and price.

00:46:39] How are Exail and Thales positioned vs BAE in anti-submarine sonar and combat management, which is where Exail mainly competes with BAE?

LS [00:46:56]: Again, it's about the technology and how to respond to the RFQ, but both companies have very good products, very battle-proven programmes, I would say, or track record. It depends on the customer and the requirements. At least I think now Exail has upped their game by joining Thales. Of course, it's a competition like everything else.

00:47:26] Exail has secured large multi-hundred-million-euro programme wins in maritime, mine hunting and robotics. Do you think the company can smoothly ramp up manufacturing and supply chains to meet this strong order intake without experiencing major delivery bottlenecks or significant margin dilution?

LS [00:47:54]: I think everyone has challenges when it comes to logistics and supply chain, but they have a good track record of delivering on time. I would guesstimate that they will keep on doing that. I think everyone working in the technology industry now is having challenges with getting raw material and not to get the right hardware at the right time. I'm not very afraid of them being not delivering on time.

00:48:30] Would you say Exail will remain an open supplier for third-party OEM manufacturers, or could its components be restricted to internal Thales platforms?

LS [00:48:42]: No. I think it's going to stay open. They're going to keep on supporting their customers as they have in the past, both on the civilian and military market. It's going to be interesting to see how they put Exail into their company structure.

00:49:04] Do you think competing tier-1 defence primes such as BAE, Fincantieri and Saab will continue to buy Exail's inertial navigation systems, or could those sales decline due to Thales' ownership?

LS [00:49:23]: No, I don't think it's going to affect that. Usually, when you are delivering into frigate programmes or things like that, it's a long cycle where you test your system into their backbone and digital architecture. It has been tested, proven, verified, all the environmental testing that you need to do. No, I don't think it's going to affect that at all.

00:49:53] Traditionally, a navy would buy a surface ship from one prime, sonar equipment from another, drones from a third and C2 software from a fourth player. A huge problem is system integration, which frequently gets delayed and runs over budget. To what extent is this mitigated now that Thales and Exail can have a plug-in system?

LS [00:50:30]: Of course, that's risk mitigation, being able to communicate on the same protocols is always risk mitigation. I think the more and more requirements for open standards, it's a requirement from every customer, meaning that you mitigate that when you are using the RFQ phase to your subsystems. I think everyone is trying to mitigate that risk. Of course, being in the same company and talking the same technology, then that's even better risk mitigation.

00:51:25] What else do you think is important about Exail's platform and growth?

LS [00:51:37]: I think it's going to be interesting to see how they adapt with new owners, new team members and new teams. They're probably going to change a little bit how they used to work in the past, adjusting to that, but I think it's going to be quite interesting.

00:51:53] Do you anticipate any integration challenges or cultural friction between Exail and Thales?

LS [00:51:59]: No, I don't think so, both French companies. I don't think that should be an issue. Of course, it's how you have done business in the past could be some friction, but no, I don't think so.

LK [00:52:12]: Awesome. I'll close the Interview there. Thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it and your very invaluable insights.

Transcription ends at 00:52:28 of the recorded material