Confidential discussion brief · 24 August 2026
PPS 3.0 working shorthand
A decision brief for Matt and Nicole: the proposed Stage 1 build, the three strategic pathways, and the commercial and operating terms that need to be designed.
Scope boundary: this brief addresses PPS Group only. Earth 3.0 is covered in its own partner architecture and does not form part of the PPS Stage 1 mandate, economics or decision.
What Monday needs to decide.
A useful outcome is a bounded three-month mandate to build the next version of PPS, with commercial terms, decision rights and team conditions clear enough that work can start immediately.
Three live pathways.
These are genuinely different operating models. Stage 1 should compare them against the same criteria before PPS commits.
PPS and Xylem define the Australian market, sales, delivery and governance roles within a potential JV structure.
Broad water technology portfolio, global scale and an existing Australian presence can accelerate credibility and solution depth.
Strategic appetite, territory and exclusivity, governance, economics, sales ownership, delivery responsibility, technology access and time to agreement.
A global water-technology business that designs and builds its own relevant products is assessed as a genuine alternative to Xylem. Integrators and resellers assembling third-party systems do not enter this screen.
Negotiating leverage, a closer fit for mining or distributed remote-community delivery, and freedom from a single-provider assumption.
Owned products and technology, manufacturing responsibility, portfolio breadth, Australian references, local service, warranty position, partner appetite and commercial fit.
PPS secures investment, remains the lead business and deliberately assembles third-party technology suppliers project by project. This is the supplier-integration pathway, distinct from Route B.
Greater control, a larger share of enterprise value and flexibility to remain technology-agnostic.
Capital requirement, balance-sheet risk, engineering and integration capability, warranties, delivery governance, working capital and operating team depth.
Nicole's proposed role and conditions.
Nicole is proposing a three-month contractor build at two days per week, followed by a potential one-year Managing Director role at three days per week if the business case and Stage 2 terms are right. Scarlet supports Nicole as Chief of Staff across both stages. Salary, equity and any broader support to Matt remain discussion items, not agreed terms.
Nicole at $4,000 per day for two days per week. Confirm start and end dates, GST basis, authority, deliverables, information access and expenses in the written scope.
If Matt needs more than two days in a week, the additional time is requested and mutually agreed in advance, subject to Nicole's availability, and billed at the agreed contractor day rate unless otherwise documented.
Potential one-year appointment from the new year at three days per week, with the option to discuss a later chair or non-executive role. Role, authority, liability and exit conditions require formal documentation.
Discuss cash salary, equity percentage, current valuation, vesting or earn-in mechanics, dilution, tax treatment, good/bad leaver terms and what "share of the ultimate business" means.
Scarlet supports Nicole through Stage 1 and Stage 2 with strategic coordination, decision support, people and opportunity diligence, and the operating structure Nicole needs around the role.
Nicole will raise the possibility of Scarlet supporting both Nicole and Matt, with additional strategic and advisory support to Matt similar to the support she provides Nicole. The purpose is to gauge receptivity before scope, time or terms are designed.
Define what Nicole can commit, negotiate, hire, spend and represent; what remains with Matt; and how disagreements or conflicts are resolved.
Discuss ending the Poynton Stavrianou retainer and moving any residual support to an hourly arrangement before Nicole begins direct work for Matt. Record all client, supplier, investor, related-party and outside-business conflicts from the outset.
Commercial, tax, employment and equity terms require legal, tax and accounting advice. This brief records the discussion agenda; it is not advice or an offer.
An illustrative three-month Stage 1 workplan.
This sequence sits inside the proposed three-month engagement at two days per week. If Matt needs additional capacity in any week, Nicole and Matt agree those days in advance, subject to availability.
Mandate
Confirm objectives, authority, Nicole's scope, Scarlet's Chief of Staff support to Nicole, commercial process, conflict plan, priority opportunities, information access and diligence criteria. Any wider support to Matt remains exploratory.
Pathway proof
Engage Xylem and manufacturer alternatives; test owned technology, product fit, Australian delivery, economics and the PPS-led capital path.
Business build
Define target markets, first contracts, entity/JV options, supplier model, delivery partners, pipeline, capital requirement and operating team.
Commit
Select pathway; agree term-sheet direction; confirm the proposed three-day-per-week Managing Director terms for Stage 2; sequence contracts, capital, hires and first delivery.
Stage 1 outputs
Pathway recommendation, rationale, risks and conditions.
Documented discussions, capability fit and commercial parameters.
Revenue model, capital need, delivery responsibility and risk allocation.
Entity/JV route, governance, team, pipeline and first 12-month plan.
Manufacturer-only partner starting set.
No company below is a confirmed partner. A candidate enters this Route B screen only where official product material shows that it designs and builds relevant water or process technology itself. Integrators and businesses dependent on third-party product assembly are excluded.
Broad water-technology manufacturer with its own treatment, filtration, disinfection, pumping, monitoring and service portfolio. It remains the benchmark against which the ownership and breadth of any Route B alternative should be tested.
Direct manufacturer candidate with proprietary and standardised systems across reverse osmosis, desalination, clarification and industrial water treatment, including AMDRO, Opus, Sirion and Spidflow product families. Full Australian portfolio ownership and delivery coverage still require diligence.
Manufactures complete evaporation, freshwater-generation and zero-liquid-discharge systems, including AlfaFlash and AQUA Blue. It passes the product-builder test, although its water portfolio is narrower than Xylem's and may suit a specialist rather than whole-partner role.
Designs and manufactures pumps, mixers, grinders and process equipment for municipal, industrial and mine-water applications. It passes the ownership test for its equipment portfolio, but breadth and suitability as a full strategic partner need to be tested.
First diligence questions for every candidate
What does the company design, build and warrant itself? Which components, if any, still come from third parties?
Can the owned portfolio cover the required solution, or would PPS still need to assemble a material third-party stack?
Which projects, approvals, service teams and long-term O&M capacity already exist?
Mining, remote communities, desalination, brine, purification and modular deployment: where are they genuinely proven?
JV, licence, distribution, EPC, supplier, build-own-operate or non-exclusive project partnership?
Who owns engineering, performance guarantees, warranty, commissioning, compliance and whole-of-life service?
The questions to leave answered.
If these are answered, Nicole can convert the conversation into a scope and begin. If they are not, the build remains an interesting possibility without authority.