After rereading my notes, I must come to the conclusion that when I start reading a company’s financials, I think most of the time I want the company to pass (I know it seems bad - letting in trash instead of great compounders) - so I must change.The next article will have the final verdict.I’m biased for this company to win.If you become a Founding Member of the NabzdykRatings Software today (€9/mo), I will manually grant you Premium Access to this Substack for free.Become a founding memberPhase 2.1. Due to government agencies being their clients, charging higher prices suddenly isn’t an option: contracts.2. $1B + 3 years + brilliant scientist = failed ING Grad? I think not, as they clearly have extensive knowledge AND trust gained from previous contracts needed to perform work on pieces of high significance (historical places). The government values trust.3. This product costs the government cents, but possibly the payback is in dollars—restored sites turn into museums & no public backlash, from ruined historical places (which would result in chaos). Saves dollars: very possible.4. An idiot would fail this company. It needs to be guided well.5. Even if tech improves, people will value old architecture due to historical significance.Phase 3.WargameCapital-light:Competitors’ logic:Their services are complex. If I create a 90% cheaper solution for the government, I will destroy all competition.Why this fails: Governments want a track record of success, not cheaper prices. Trust is not transferable.Top 10 shareholders in ING GradAI backlash:You argued that a competitor bidding 90% cheaper would fail because “Governments want a track record, not cheaper prices.”The Forensic Reality: These are EU-funded projects in Croatia. Public procurement laws often mandate selecting the “Economically Most Advantageous Tender.” If a large European competitor (e.g., Strabag or Skanska) enters the Croatian heritage market with a lower bid and a similar track record, “Trust” will not save ING-grad’s margin.The Kill Question: If a major EU firm decides to “buy” market share in Croatia by bidding at a 0% margin for three years to bankrupt local players (Subsidized Liquidity), how does ING-grad survive?You wrote: “An idiot would fail this company. It needs to be guided well.”The Audit: Peter Lynch’s rule is: “Buy a business that any idiot can run, because sooner or later, one will.”The Consequence: If ING-grad requires the “Genius” of Brizar to navigate government relations and subcontractor management, then your investment is Key Man Dependent. If Brizar leaves, your 132% ROIC likely leaves with him. This must be listed as a primary risk in your 5-page PDF.Ing Grad won’t survive something like that UNLESS their cash reserves allow them to sustain the most pessimistic scenario for three years straight.