Hi Peter,

By the market reaction, investors clearly did not like this new update, I think that specifically the switch of the business model from selling to leasing.

I can think of a few reasons for that:

- As you mentioned, it is more capital intensive for Pyro, so you need to team up with other leasing companies, which translates into more delays (we all know that it takes a long time to sign a clear and detailed contract of that magnitude) and possible shared revenue and more dillution, to satisfy such partner.

- as an example, we all know about the agreement (I do not recall if a ferm contract has been signed?) with the Japanes company, for leasing Drosrite systems, which has yet to provide any revenue (that we know of) after what, some 2 years or longer? 

-  While you mention that leasing is more advantageous than selling, the revenue will come gradually vs a good one time payment plus recurring maintenance revenues; I assume (please correct me if I am wrong) that , since the equipment is owned by PYR, PYR will be in charge for maintaining it, so the maintenance revenue is gone.

- It is not clear if Clients A, B, C contracts consider the leasing, or selling the torches.

- Based on previous releases, it was understood and hoped that Client C had contacted you directly to purchase torches without modelling; while I know that "slow is smooth ..") it sounds like this contract, and therefore revenues coming from it, will be delayed because of the modelling; again, contrary to what market was expecting.

Can you provide more info to address the above points, please? 

Without some more details, investors are left to speculate on what, ifs, when, why, etc, hence the big drop in share price.

Thank you.

poetech2