RE:RE:Sicpa lost EU fuel marking tenderNOT wrong ... Having gone through this document more than once over the last couple of weeks, CM4 does not come across as a serious contender which is summarized in the overall score (Figure 21 & 22 / Page 47 & 48).
The conclusion (page 53) speaks for itself. CM2 is the clear winner in terms of test results and roadside cost.
SCHEER will not change this as there is no environment impact to speak of.
Politics may change it but to bet on that would be worse than casino odds. We all know that the “house” wins but we just don’t know who the “house” is in this case.
As for your argument that the GC/MS roadside test requires the setup of a “field lab” at a gas station, that’s just plain BS. Portable GC/MS systems are a dime dozen just like the run of the mill EDXRFD systems Xenemetrix offers. One of many examples:
https://www.norlab.com/library/overview-article/10161 As I said, I have had lots of time to digest this document and thus had lots of time to pick up EUO shares around 7.5 cents. I didn’t as I no longer see SICPA as a EU contract contender.
PS: As for today’s craziness ... While I am not sure what started it, it’s pretty obvious what / who ended up driving it and it certainly isn’t or shouldn’t be based on the prospect of a positive EU tender outcome.