Apologies for the double post; the first was from my phone and I did not realise it would become garbled. Have requested it to be removed.
You make a good observation.
I believe the previous comments which negatively portrayed the applicability of Hadrian as limited due to the current single storey restrictions to be naïve. But for arguments sake, let's consider some facts, rather than hyperbole!
It's not just developing nations where you observe this, Cyprus is a part of EU and aside from some disastrous governance over the last 15-20 years is a prosperous place.
A lot of places, particularly in Europe, but also Northern and Latin America, have regulations which limit the type of building relative to some historical architecture (see link[1]).
[1]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_restriction_laws
Now in western Europe, being a "first world" region, there is great statistical information available regarding dwellings (see link[2]), which indicates that lower density housing runs the gamut of single to majority (see UK and Ireland) of percentages.
If we consider at least a reasonable proportion of these to be single to 2 storey buildings at most that is quite a decent chunk.
[2]
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=File
istribution_of_population_by_dwelling_type,_2015_(%_of_population)_YB17.png
These are countries with a housing stock of at least 2000 at worst case (see link[3]). At 2000 houses and a list price of $2M per machine that is $1,000 per Hadrian deployed if done so at face value, however its likely that the cost basis for a plant would be amortised, depreciated effectively and probably sold to partially fund newer models eventually, but I digress.
[3]
http://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/attachments/e2-housing-stock-1991-date.xlsx
In addition, buildings of 2-3 storeys should not be exceptionally more difficult to build as a next iteration of the Hadrian. It will of course require upgraded software and perhaps additional articulation segments of the boom but otherwise the structural support is distributed via compression at such low heights so little else needs to change.
With regards to those posting negative opinions, I do not seek to offend; but I do take umbrage with emotive language being used without corresponding rationale.... i.e; don't talk **** unless you're willing to back it up with some kind of coherent thought. With only a few minutes of digging up even basic statistics you can see that the market for Hadrian is massive, what it all comes down to is execution.
Normally I am a lurker and not a poster; but I see the down rampers trying it on with FBR without even some semblance of reason.
