Chris's message forced me to think again about what the possible valuation of POET could be.

We have Pellegrino, an expert in doing valuations, who said $1B, and later we got $10B from Taylor, and expert in the technology and the needs of the industry currently. This just highlights the difficulty in putting a price tag on POET, as Chris just wrote about.

Pellegrino was asked to focus on only 3 market applications. This *could* be the reason for the comparatively low valuation. But consider that the word "tablet" appears nowhere in the redacted valuation (I'm assuming is wasn’t redacted). At that time NOBODY predicted the rise of the tablet as it is seen today. Pellegrino probably underestimated the decline of the personal computer over the same time frame when he punched the numbers into his spreadsheet. Hence the moving platform Chris described. POET's markets are changing very quickly and what Pellegrino saw in 2010 could look very different now.

Having said that, there's no way that the value should be off by $9B, even with other markets excluded. We never really got an explanation from OPEL about why they fought to suppress the valuation, but at this point I'm thinking they thought it was far too low. Still much higher than today's current SP would suggest.

As for Taylor's valuation, I think someone suggested that the $10B opportunity might be what is realized by the acquiring company, not necessarily by the current shareholders. This might be an example of what might "[mute the] size and scope" of our investment. Nevertheless, I think it's right to add to the Pellegrino report rather than subtract from it, even as the patents have sat on the shelf and development of competing technologies may have advanced while ours were delayed.

The last thing I'll consider is that if the value of POET is this difficult to determine for Chris, Pellegrino and Taylor, imagine how difficult it is for us shareholders! The difficulty faced by current shareholders is staggering. Potential bidders for POET technology don’t have earnings to help determine a buyout price, and we don't have them either! So we really don't have the usual tools in our toolbox to decide if the current price is fair or not. This is why nerves are frayed here on the board. This is why the SP itself is believed to be a signal of sentiment about the technology. This is why the way the company disseminates information is more important than it is for mining companies. We are constantly asking ourselves how much truth there is in this story. The fact that we have no earnings and the fact that this story is almost unique in how it will play out draws in so much emotion . . .