LaserVideo Inc, Disctronics Manufacturing, Inc & Disc Manufacturing, Inc

I have recently been in with a former employee of Disc Manufacturing, Inc. who was kind enough to share some really great information about the plant and I think if what I have learned is not already known and noted here, some updates might be in order to label pages, parent companies, notes, history etc.

He did tell me that before they were Disc Manufacturing Inc they were owned by Australian Disctronics company. I found this pdf here, which helps explain what he told me and a whole lot of other useful information:

http://www.shoalslawyers.com/attorneys/notable_opinions/Massey%20v.%20Disc%20Mfg.pdf

From above article: DMI, the other plaintiff in this case, was acquired by Quixote on April 30, 1990. From January 1988 to May or June 1990, DMI was known as Disctronics Manufacturing, Inc., and before January 1988, it was known
as LaserVideo, Inc.

He advised me about the matrix runouts on the discs:
the W.O.# is DMI's internal work order number and the S.O.# was the customers identification number. With the W.O.#, it was between 4 and 6 digits long with a hyphen and then a 1 or 2 digit number afterwards. The numbers to the left of the hyphen were the work order number and the digits to the right of the hyphen were the cut number indicating the number of times the master was cut. Sometimes quality issues or the need for millions of discs or quick turn-around times resulted in multiple cuts.

(Here is an example of what he is saying, (this one is without the letters "S.O." though - I think they came later) http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=4003467

Using the example above, the work-order number was 25929 and the "-1" indicates that this was made from the first cut.

He also says: After the Disc Mfg, Inc. logo, we would sometimes include an "A" or an "H" and a number. The "A" indicated the disc was manufactured in Anaheim, California and the "H" indicated the disc was manufactured in Huntsville, Alabama. The number indicated which LBR (Laser Beam Recorder) that cut the master.

Here is an example of this, where you can see an [H7] after the DISC MFG, INC.: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=3374971

Here is an older example (1988?) when it is still DISCTRONICS but contains the (H) in the matrix: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=3088337

Here is an another 80's example but without either company credited in the matrix : http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=1386796

And here is one last late 80's example where LaserVideo Inc (before Disctronics M, I.) has been credited on the cd label side, but again, same type of matrix.
http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=3976326

So it can be seen that before they became DMI a certain matrix system is in use which continued on after the company changes.

More information he revealed to me:

Work Order numbers on the disc were assigned sequentially, the lower the number, the earlier the disc was mastered, but not replicated (that's an important distinction). The work order was assigned before the master was cut and remained constant even if the disc was replicated multiple times. that the master was used to make a single "Father" and the father was used to make as many as 20 "Mothers". Each mother could then be used to make as many as 20 stampers, with each stamper capable of making up to 100,000 discs. If a mother or stamper wasn't completely used up (worn out), it would be filed away in our vault for future use. In other words, discs from a particular work order number might be pressed weeks, months or even years after the master was cut if additional discs were required. Still, the sequential nature of the work order number can be a useful method to determine the order different discs were cut.
Regarding discs that were pressed at both plants, that did happen some times, but the master and mothers were usually made at one plant and shipped to the other. Sometimes, if multiple master tapes were available, the order might be cut and plated at both plants at the same time, but in that case, each plants order would have a separate work order number. There started to be a little confusion in the assignment of work order numbers between the two plants and at that point each plant was given a range of work order numbers and that is when we switched over to the 6-digit 100000 range numbers.

Regarding a letter after the cut number: example: W.O. 100559-1V He says: In those days some of DMI's employees did some of their own projects on the side and a letter after the cut number signified those types of projects.
-----------------------------------------------------------

So this is about everything I have mustered up so far

Great stuff for pondering over skinnybutdangerous
Thanks for all the effort & sharing yet another avenue into the mystical world of pressings ;)

Pleasure swagski, I am just glad he was happy to talk about it and for me to share it here. I hope we might be able to fill in some blanks using this info, but I'm not sure how to go about it all yet

Ok, so I have been studying all this a lot more, and want to enter a few more things here from what I have found. I think some of this thread answers q's and things that came up in the Disctronics By Country thread here: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/help/forums/topic/338993

Please be patient reading all this but I will try to summarize this a bit so it's not too long, but if anyone else is highly interested in trying to sort out more about Disctronics company they will benefit to read and fully understand any articles I post up here. Below is taken from the article http://www.shoalslawyers.com/attorneys/notable_opinions/Massey%20v.%20Disc%20Mfg.pdf

In early February 1986, Donovan and Massey formed
Disctronics, Ltd., to manufacture compact audio
discs. Construction was started on a plant in Braeside
Victoria, to service the Australia and New Zealand
market. In mid-1986, Donovan traveled to Japan and
negotiated with Mitsubishi for the purpose of purchasing mastering equipment for the Braeside plant.
During the visit, Donovan learned that Mitsubishi
was in the process of building a plant in Plano,
Texas, with its t venture partner, ElectroSound, to
manufacture compact discs for the United States
market. The trial court found that, during 1986, the
Disctronics Group had begun to plan a “global strategy.” The court also found that the four key components of this “global strategy” were:
“(1) consolidation of the Australian/New Zealand
market; (2) expansion into the European and U.S.
markets through a network of sales offices and solicitation of a customer base; (3) acquisition of existing manufacturing facilities in Europe and the
U.S.; and (4) persuasion of major record companies
against ‘vertical integration’ (i.e., divesting or deemphasizing manufacturing operation)-all hopefully leading to the establishment of Disctronics
Limited as the dominant independent producer in
the compact disc industry.”
The trial court found that, as part of the Disctronics
Group's “global strategy,” Donovan had negotiated a
“memorandum of understanding” with Mitsubishi in
November 1986, which stated, in part, that “Mitsubishi Corporation, Memory Tech Corporation, and
Disctronics Limited agree to continue the development of their global relationship for the benefit of all
three partners.”

Ok, so, what I am now wondering about is that it appears Disctronics, Limited an Australian formed and based company, maybe should be (or once was) the parent company. It sounds like it has the FIRST plant in Braeside, Victoria before their expansion to the rest of the world.

As above it states the owners went to Japan to purchase from Mitsubish, the Mastering Equipment for the Braeside Plant. As we know, the discs that were pressed at the Braeside plant were pressed with DISCTRONICS B in their matrix, and all looked like this: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=1297253

Now note the relationship with Mitsubishi and that Disctronics was to later purchase that plant from them in Plano, Texas in March 1990. Before the Disctronics purchase, that plant was run by wholly owned subsidiary of MITSUBISHI - Memory Tech, Inc. (MTI) (which appears in our discogs database here http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/label/Memory-Tech+Inc.

Some time around the purchase of the Texas plant might possibly be where the name DIsctronics, Texas Inc. was formed?

Here's the next thing I think about: I'm certain that the Texas plant is where we get our releases from which started printing DISCTRONICS USA on them and looked like this: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=3744446

NOW... you can see the sameness of how the DISCTRONICS B and DISCTRONICS USA matrixes look. Being that the EQUIPMENT for the Braeside plant was purchased from Mitsubishi, and the Texas plant was BUILT by and then purchased from Mitsubishi, I am concluding this is why we see that similarity of the matrixes from these two plants even though they are on other side of the world from each other.

OK, so onto the next bit :)

LaserVideo, Inc. - http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/label/Laservideo+Inc. (This needs updating)

The company Quixote, who owned LaserVideo, Inc. sold it to Disctronics on 1/15/1988. The company had 2 plants: One in Anaheim California and another in Huntsville, Alabama. As can be seen in the example on my original post, the LaserVideo matrixes have the "W.O" (work order number) in their matrix, here is a better example: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=1174091

So, company named DISCTRONICS MANUFACTURING, INC. took over these 2 plants and this is why I believe we see those different Disctronics matrixes which I have pointed out in my original post. I refer to the matrixes such as: Made By Disctronics with (A) and (H), which included the "W.O. number" http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=3088337

Continuing on.... Disctronics defaulted on payments to Quixote for the two plants, and then on 4/30/90 they were aquired by Quixote. From there a name change was in order to Disc Manufacturing, Inc.

So some time around there must be when we start seeing Disc Manufacturing, Inc appearing in the matrixes.

According to the article, Disctronics Manufacturing, Inc. had control of the plants up until June 1990.

A few other things extracted from the article:

Disctronics, Limited - Australian Holding Company
Disctronics Australia, Limited - Australian Holding Company
Disctronics (U.S.), Inc. - Wholly owned subsidiary of Disctronics Australia, Limited
Disctronics, Inc. - Wholly owned subsidiary of Disctronics Australia, Limited

Aside from the above I have yet to look more into the European operations, but I did find another lawsuit here involving DIsctronics, Limited http://oami.europa.eu/legaldocs/opposition/2002/EN/1281-2002.pdf

This was from 2002 I believe, and at top of page we see Disctronics listed as the opponent of the case:
Disctronics Limited
Level 17, 500 Collins Street
Melbourne, Victoria
Australia

So as per google search Disctronics Ltd was delisted from the Australian Stock Exchange in 1998 but still remained active.

In 2004 according to link below they changed company name to Hedron Investments Pty Ltd.
https://creditorwatch.com.au/company/profile/99009556638/WORLD-ASSET-MANAGEMENT-LIMITED

skinnybutdangerous - I provided that PDF file 4 months ago...
http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/history?label=Disctronics+B#latest

I managed to read more of your post. It's kinda huge....
When you left a note on the main Disctronics page, I thought this thread will be about the main infos of Disctronics, but no.
When I started to read your thread HERE, I thought it will be about the Australian Disctronics, but no...

Your basic thread is about the US arm of the UK company, while your postcomment (which is also huge) is about the Australian subsidiary.

skinnybutdangerous
In 2004 according to link below they changed company name to Hedron Investments Pty Ltd.
https://creditorwatch.com.au/company/profile/99009556638/WORLD-ASSET-MANAGEMENT-LIMITED

The PDF that you linked above (Massey vs. Disc MFG) states the company (Disctronics, Ltd.) was established in 1998.
It is contradictive with Creditorwatch's info: DISCTRONICS LTD - from 2000-07-01 to 2000-07-25

This contradictive part shows that these manufacturing companies are fucking mess :/
It took me about 2 days, till I could properly update all Disctronics pages on Discogs. I made real hunts for the company logos.
I encountered some contradictive informations as well in my searches. I kept only the most valuable infos.

After reading your thread, I'm still not sure about your intentions :)
Would you like to add extra infos to Disctronics USA page about the US subsidiary?

Disctronics Inc. vs. Disctronics Texas Inc.
First I thought 'Disctronics Inc.' is the proper name. But ing from multiple sources, it became clear that the legal name is 'Disctronics Texas Inc.'
I digged all the web.archived Disctronics main and subpages :/

I'm opened to any additions which is not contradictive.

Hi, yes I am interested in trying to sort out more about the Disctronics company. My intentions are to try and get the varied Disctronics releases in their right places ad maybe even get a few parent companies worked out.

Firstly no, I am not talking about a US arm of the UK company. It was the US arm of the Australian company from all the I have read so far. I know I have posted info about a range of things so I guess that might confuse people on the outside looking in, but I was trying to get as much info up as possible to try and work out with others the best options for sorting this out. I don't know if anyone really wants to touch this though haha :) So I read through so much stuff trying to piece things together so I increase my understanding and then I have written what I have.

I think you are mistaken about Disctronics Limited being formed in 1998? I didn't see that written in article. I only put that credit watch link in there to show the name change in 2004 to Hedron, I am aware it doesnt show anything before 2000. It says in the law article "In early February 1986, Donovan and Massey (Both Australian I believe, I know Massey is) formed Disctronics, Ltd., to manufacture compact audio discs. " The name was in use since the beginning because the first Australian pressings back in the 80's used to have Distronics Limited printed on their cd label side. The article from the lawsuit which I see you did post 4 months ago :) (sorry I hadn't noticed that until after I started this thread) is from early 90's and states Disctronics Ltd in its proceedings and as being Australian.

Anyways, what I was trying to establish was if Disctronics Limited was or should actually the parent company of all... Do you recall from the law article about the operation starting in Australia before expansion to other parts of the world? I haven't yet found where the UK comes into it except that I recall reading a company called Quatro owned a share of Disctronics Ltd. If Quatro was a UK company then I get where this UK thing is coming from but otherwise I haven't yet seen anything else that actually says Disctronics was a UK company. And keep in mind the person I was in with about DMI was an employee there and told me it was owned by "Australian company Disctronics".

The first move into US market was the purchase in 1988 of Huntsville and Anaheim plants from Quixote (LaserVideo Inc) where it was renamed Disctronics Manufacturing Inc, and that is why the Disctronics matrixes look the same as LaserVideo, Inc matrixes from 1988 up until 1990. Then when Quixote took back those 2 plants in 1990 and changed the name to Disc Manufacturing Inc. we start seeing their Disc Manufacturing Inc name appear on matrixes from around then on.

So now I propose for the US Disctronics release during 1988-1990 do we:

A) Make the label name Disctronics Manufacturing, Inc. (which could then be parent label Of LaserVideo, Inc.) and file those releases from 1988-1990 under this name

or

B) Create Disctronics A, and Disctronics H for the releases pressed during 1988-1990 to be filed under.. they are assigned to each plant by an (A) or an (H) seen in their matrix.

From what I was trying to point out earlier I can see Disctronics Ltd bought equipment for construction of the Australian plant in 1986 from Mitsubishi, then also bought the Mitsubishi owned plant in Texas in 1990, I conclude this is why the matrixes look the same from these 2 plants as I was pointing out in above post.

Disctronics presses from the Texas plant were pressed with DISCTRONICS USA in the matrix on many but not all of them... For the moment I think they should stay as is, however I do have some pressings from same plant with "DTI" in the matrix rather than DISCTRONICS USA.. I suspect this might stand for Disctronics Texas Inc., but I personally have been putting these under Disctronics Usa.

I am yet to study it, but I believe US releases after 1990 which have a different matrix and only say "Disctronics", are maybe from yet again another plant (maybe they bought or built another somewhere?) see here: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=3548512

Totally different matrix to those coming out of Texas plant.

And then there's the UK entries which are maybe going to need some refinements too but I haven't looked into that much yet.

And I agree Disctronics is a mess. I updated already the LaserVideo, Inc. page and the Disc Manufacturing Inc pages, that was the easy part. :)

Thank you very much for all these information. I really liked!

hwanin
skinnybutdangerous - I provided that PDF file 4 months ago...http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/history?label=Disctronics+B#latest

And I provided it in November 2011 (document link now dead) :P

Anyway, the US info about the matrice lettering A and H is particularly useful.

The best thing I've read about the Disctronics Australia scene was this:
http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/help/forums/topic/338993?page=2#3254647

Edit: Remove the part about contradictory info.

skinnybutdangerous
So now I propose for the US Disctronics release during 1988-1990 do we:

How do you propose to separate releases to use the profile. The release date would not be good enough. We should be crediting what is on the release. If they are trading under just "Disctronics" on the release, irrespective of ownership of the plant in the given territory, the brand is what is being credited. A parent would be unhelpful as the brand has different owners per territory.

B) Create Disctronics A, and Disctronics H for the releases pressed during 1988-1990 to be filed under.. they are assigned to each plant by an (A) or an (H) seen in their matrix.

Yep. Just as we have done with Disctronics B and S.

The current main Disctronics page is meant to be a catch all where just "Disctronics" is credited on the release or within the matrix.

kraftone
Thank you very much for all these information. I really liked!

Cheers kraftone.

Eviltoastman
How do you propose to separate releases to use the profile. The release date would not be good enough. We should be crediting what is on the release. If they are trading under just "Disctronics" on the release, irrespective of ownership of the plant in the given territory, the brand is what is being credited. A parent would be unhelpful as the brand has different owners per territory.

I was thinking the releases would be separated to use the profile from the info in the matrix of a release which is specific to when those plant were being used, however I see it is probably a bad idea to do like that... it will only be more confusing for people if it was that way.

So anyone have a problem with creating Disctronics A and Disctronics H ? Silence will mean there is no problem here!

Eviltoastman
The current main Disctronics page is meant to be a catch all where just "Disctronics" is credited on the release or within the matrix.

I hadn't actually realized that because I saw other releases lumped into there also, but when I was thinking about all this that's what I thought it should be for too... The label page needs to be updated soon with a note about that. - I wonder if some of those US releases like this: http://discogs.sitiosdesbloqueados.info/viewimages?release=3548512 got glass mastered or pressed in other countries plants for some reason (too many orders in Texas at times?) cos I cant find any info of Disctronics having any other plant in the US from early to mid 90's other than Texas... who knows.

I am still yet to find any information about Disctronics being a UK company and the article I wil post next will probably disprove it from being a UK company. I still haven't got any information about how the company got started in UK or Europe either.

Interestingly, I found this old Billboard article from 1986 that says Disctronics Ltd was listed on the Australian Stock Exchange in 1984. It also states that offices had been opened in Los Angeles and London and that the first orders done at the new Australian plant will be shipped to the US & UK which are "Disctronics major areas of interest at present".
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tyQEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA56&dq=bill+board+disctronics&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GPfrUJmFB8fFmQWKk4DAAw&ved=0CGIQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=bill%20board%20disctronics&f=false

Finally, I will repost that important part of the law suit:

The trial court found that, during 1986, the
Disctronics Group had begun to plan a “global strategy.” The court also found that the four key components of this “global strategy” were:
“(1) consolidation of the Australian/New Zealand
market; (2) expansion into the European and U.S.
markets through a network of sales offices and solicitation of a customer base; (3) acquisition of existing manufacturing facilities in Europe and the
U.S.; and (4) persuasion of major record companies
against ‘vertical integration’ (i.e., divesting or deemphasizing manufacturing operation)-all hopefully leading to the establishment of Disctronics
Limited as the dominant independent producer in
the compact disc industry.”

and

Disctronics, Limited - Australian Holding Company
Disctronics Australia, Limited - Australian Holding Company
Disctronics (U.S.), Inc. - Wholly owned subsidiary of Disctronics Australia, Limited
Disctronics, Inc. - Wholly owned subsidiary of Disctronics Australia, Limited

So I believe some editing is in order of a few label pages, the main Disctronics page currently reads as though it is Europe's/UK so will need a bit of a fix up.

Yes, Disctronics was an Australian based company. They opened the first CD plant in Australia. In the late 80s they have bought facilities of a third CD manufacturer in the UK - Disctec. Then the company name has been renamed to Disctronics UK.

skinnybutdangerous
I am still yet to find any information about Disctronics being a UK company

"Disctronics (UK) Ltd." operated a CD plant in Blackburn from May 2002 to June 2003 under the legal name of "Disctronics Blackburn Ltd.". It was aquired from Universal M & L, UK.
From July 2003 to 2006 it was then operated by EDC Blackburn Ltd. until its closure by December 31, 2009.

kraftone
Yes, Disctronics was an Australian based company. They opened the first CD plant in Australia. In the late 80s they have bought facilities of a third CD manufacturer in the UK - Disctec. Then the company name has been renamed to Disctronics UK

Thankyou kraftone!

sebfact
"Disctronics (UK) Ltd." operated a CD plant in Blackburn from May 2002 to June 2003 under the legal name of "Disctronics Blackburn Ltd.". It was aquired from Universal M & L, UK.
From July 2003 to 2006 it was then operated by Deluxe (7) Global Media Services Ltd. (as Deluxe Blackburn Ltd.) and from 2006 to 2009 it was operating as EDC Blackburn Ltd. until its closure by December 31, 2009.

Thanks sebfact, I probably didn't make it clear enough but I was talking about Disctronics beginnings and if it was a UK head company from the start (as it has been claimed) or an Australian one which I think we now know the answer.

Here's a trade advert dated 20th June 1992 from page 19 of Billboard Magazine, confirming that all four locations traded under the same brand name even though they may not have had the same parent owners. I personally think that this helps mitigate the existence of the main Disctronics page as a catch all where the location is not advised on the release either by name or implied by the initials they employed (S, B, H, USA and UK).

Also, some info on the start of Distronics in Australia:

Local manufacture of CDs began in 1987 when the UK based firm Disctronics opened Australian plant in Melbourne... However financial problems plagued the company from the outset, and it changed hands several times through the 1990s, eventually becoming part of a major Australian printing company/magazine distribution firm.

- page 53 of 'The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound; Volume 1.

Eviltoastman
Local manufacture of CDs began in 1987 when the UK based firm Disctronics opened Australian plant in Melbourne... However financial problems plagued the company from the outset, and it changed hands several times through the 1990s, eventually becoming part of a major Australian printing company/magazine distribution firm.
- page 53 of 'The Encyclopedia of Recorded Sound; Volume 1.

I have seen this too, but it was published around 2005 from memory upon reading it, and I do believe this information to be incorrect... the first lawsuit however provides a better rundown and was from 1992, and being in a court the information presented should be factual, so I would be taking that over almost anything else personally. To me honestly, it looks like Disctronics Ltd is the parent label of everything, at least to begin with.

Then dont forget this:

skinnybutdangerous
but I did find another lawsuit here involving DIsctronics, Limited http://oami.europa.eu/legaldocs/opposition/2002/EN/1281-2002.pdf

This was from 2002 I believe, and at top of page we see Disctronics listed as the opponent of the case:
Disctronics Limited
Level 17, 500 Collins Street
Melbourne, Victoria
Australia

This case from 2002 was Disctronics Ltd in a lawsuit against German company I think it was, involving them using the name "DISCTRONIC" with no "S".

skinnybutdangerous
court the information presented should be factual,

I feel it's factual.

The lawsuits are a snapshot but tell us nothing about ownership. I dealt with court papers every day for many years and we'd get multiple versions of our company names and brands and cross correspondence from companies we used to own etc. They are prone to error.

The book seems well researched. An interesting fact is that over a 15 year period, in the UK, the Disctronics brand has been used by more than 5 different ed UK companies.

Also, the trademark used by all branches of Disctronics however locally ownedd is owned by Disctronics (IP) Limited, based in St Hellier, Jersey and was ed in the UK 24/08/1986 wehich predates the move into Australia.
http://www.jersey-companies.com/disctronics-ip-limited-RC84011/
http://www.trademarkia.com/disctronics-73706163.html

I dont think there was a move into Australia, i think it started there, by Australian citizens... then moved into the rest of the world... they went through that in the 1992 court case... and that billboard article I posted states how they plan to make first orders in Braeside plant and ship them to US and the UK. The info on that link above you provided doesnt say it was reg'd in the UK 1986, it says: On Tuesday, January 19, 1988, a U.S. federal trademark registration was filed for DISCTRONICS by DISCTRONICS (IP) LIMITED, ST. HELIER, JERSEY... So a filing date in 1988 and goes on to have a reg date in 1992. Then below it says first use ANYWHERE (of word Disctronics) was 1986... That could very well mean in Australia.

I think part of the problem here is because the Australian plant was sold early on and the remaining operations are all overseas we are left with mostly only the company names and information of those later plants and operations and then everything about it's origins fades away as all people see is the more current operations.

Again this seems to predate anything else: In early February 1986, Donovan and Massey formed
Disctronics, Ltd., to manufacture compact audio
discs. Construction was started on a plant in Braeside
Victoria, to service the Australia and New Zealand
market.

Eviltoastman
The current main Disctronics page is meant to be a catch all where just "Disctronics" is credited on the release or within the matrix.

It currently doesn't represent that, which is a problem because it is representing as the UK arm and there are loads of Disctronics "S" releases being filed in there.

Article from "New Scientist, Novermber 1986" about the newly opened UK Disctec plant in Southwater. This is clearly the same plant which the "Disctronics S" UK pressings were coming from. Now the question is when did the purchase of this plant by Disctronics occur.

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=beBFR2Kyg3oC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=disctec+southwater&source=bl&ots=oIbOpq0bBi&sig=j5faMTm2NqPflUx7VCsN9nUUqoI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zwfyUMH2Lu2KmwXKj4GwDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=disctec%20southwater&f=false