Deletion of BOFA International

Comment: I don't know what to make of this company.  Based on press releases and similar non-reliable sources, this company seems to be known within its industry., but I wasn't able to find ''independent,  reliable, secondary'' sources that would demonstrate its notability beyond announcements of the Queen's award.  As I said on the article's talk page, just getting the award doesn't meet , but it's an indicator that this company probably has been mentioned in a non-trivial way in multiple reliable sources.  I just haven't found any yet
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: As things stand, I am neither seeing nor finding sufficient |coverage that would demonstrate notability per . Happy to reverse that view if someone can locate references (including from specialist press) to demonstrate that, though
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (:WP:RS||:WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: I would have thought that a company with a revenue of £12M was notable, though I am not clear if this is turnover or profit.  I would have hoped to find a guideline on a threshold in .  The article certainly needs improvement and better sourcing.  If ther company is exploiting patents, that is worth mentioning.  Unfortuately, since many industrial companies are marketing their products to other companies or wholesalers, they may fail to be in the public eye and hence appear not to be notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)