Commercial · the lab book
The case as four experiments. Each states what should happen, the latest reported reading, and the result that would prove it wrong. The site gives no verdict; the next report is the next reading.
Experiment 01
Hypothesis
The demand the case rests on is written into law. If the law holds, converters have to buy recycled PET whatever the economy does.
Proven wrong by
A delegated act that delays 2030 or lowers the PET target.
Latest reading
30% recycled PET in food-contact packaging, from 2030
REPORTED Regulation (EU) 2025/40, Art. 7 · read 16 Sep 2026
Next reading · Year-End Report 2026, 29 Jan 2027TO BE ENTERED
Experiment 02
Hypothesis
If the law creates the demand, recycling should become a large part of sales before the older business shrinks away.
Proven wrong by
Recycling growth slowing below the rate the rest of the group shrinks.
Latest reading
Recycling 9.3 MSEK ≈ $953k of group sales 41.6 MSEK ≈ $4.3M, Q3 26
A year earlier: 5.6 of 45.5 MSEK, Q3 25
REPORTED Interim report Q3 26
Next reading · Year-End Report 2026, 29 Jan 2027TO BE ENTERED
Experiment 03
Hypothesis
A customer that has approved the additive should start producing with it. Approvals that never convert mean tests, not demand.
Proven wrong by
The approved count rising while the commercial count stalls.
Latest reading
31 projects in commercial production, 7 Oct 2026
Before: 28, Q2 2026. Technically approved now: 14
REPORTED The pipeline, as the company counts it
Next reading · Year-End Report 2026, 29 Jan 2027TO BE ENTERED
Experiment 04
Hypothesis
One large order can be a stock-up. A business is when orders of that size come again, from the same customer or another.
Proven wrong by
The next reports passing with no order of similar size.
Latest reading
1 order reported in the last twelve months
~5.0 MSEK ≈ $512k · 20 Oct 2026
REPORTED Press release · 20 Oct 2026
Next reading · Year-End Report 2026, 29 Jan 2027TO BE ENTERED
Readings are reported figures, read from the rows the rest of the site shows. The hypotheses and what would disprove them are the site's own words, not forecasts.