Trace Intercept Team

In infrastructure ownership, optionality is often discussed in abstract terms. The ability to refinance, restructure, exit, or adapt to regulatory change is treated as a function of market conditions and timing. In practice, optionality depends on something more prosaic: confidence. And confidence depends on whether the reality of the asset

Due diligence is where comfortable assumptions meet pressure. It is not designed to validate what is already believed, but to expose what might go wrong. In that sense, it functions as a stress test for evidence. What survives scrutiny under time constraint, adversarial questioning, and third-party review is treated as

In infrastructure valuation, asset age is often treated as a shorthand for risk. Older assets are assumed to be closer to failure, more expensive to maintain, and less adaptable to future requirements. Age is easy to record, easy to compare, and easy to model. As a result, it features prominently

UK water utilities spend a great deal of time discussing cost efficiency, delivery risk, and regulatory compliance. Far less time is spent asking a simpler question: what does it cost when evidence is not trusted? In Drainage and Wastewater Management Plan (DWMP) delivery, lack of trust rarely stops work outright.

In many infrastructure programmes, delivery risk appears to emerge late. Scope changes surface during detailed design, costs increase during construction planning, and schedules slip as constraints become clearer. These outcomes are often treated as unfortunate but unavoidable. In practice, they are frequently the result of decisions made much earlier, when