I'm starting a new thread rather than to reply, to avoid the ad hominem (although it's tempting!) and I'm going to use the word "entitlement" both in it's true meaning and in the common usage with all of the negative connotations. In truth it's a response to an argument put forth earlier basically equating the retail shareholder to the Chief Scientist & inventor of POET.

I feel that Geoff is entitled to dispose of his shares whenever he needs them. He has many roles besides inventing the technology we hope will succeed beyond our wildest dreams. He is a director of POET Tech and has responsibilities towards all shareholders. He has a wife (and kids?) and has responsibilities towards her. He has responsibilities to himself as a 68 year old with a lifetime of effort toward a goal that could very well change the trajectory of humankind. With so much responsibility, all of which handled so skilfully, it's hard to entertain the notion that he would make a move without thinking it through.

I believe that the NR couldn’t be any clearer. He has sold $400+k in shares to last him 2 years, in addition to his pay. He paid himself an extra $200k per year using shares HE IS ENTITLED TO SELL. It's part of his pay!

Is it not reasonable to think that if Copetti's forecast of revenues before year end come to pass that Geoff will not get another opportunity to sell before 2016? If deals are to be reached under NDA in quick succession as POET gets mass-adopted he (and others) will be virtually locked in until the signings level off and become “less material”. Also there is the matter of the NASDAQ listing that he would not with to jeopardize by selling after revenue begins.

But there's another type of entitlement I'm seeing clearly from some posts here (not many thankfully) which seems to suggest that Geoff should endure hardships for the sake of long suffering longs. Really?! Are we equals now?! Did we as retail shareholders revolutionize the semi industry during the years we have had shares? Have we been forbidden to sell at any time (halts excluded)? Did we do anything at all but push the buy button with greedy little fingers? Of course, management is responsible for maximizing shareholder value. But if we don't like what they are doing we have recourse to SELL! Think of what Geoff endured when solar was failing and directors continued with the losing proposition anyway. He has already taken one for the team (at least one) IMO. I feel that those shareholders with these feelings of entitlement after making “sacrifices” to keep our shares over the years should remind ourselves of the relatively insignificant role we play in the success of the company and rethink our position.

So I hope my point is clear. If there is anyone we need to trust to exercise good judgment it's Geoff. We may never know the specifics about why he needs a cash infusion, but again, it's the type of decision I think Geoff is capable of making.

Sorry for the rant :S