Hi Harry,

The message coming over from the Murdoc Capital Symposium was how the 'skyrocketing costs' of development were the major factor in the markets' future development. Surely one of the principle benefits of POET is that its unique performance envelope can be achieved using existing Fab equipment and processes. Is this not what is meant by a disruptive technology?

Couple this with the rapid development offered by Fab 2, I personally cannot see why products cannot be available in a much shorter timescale than your statement of 3-5 years. Besides which that statement is somewhat a 'wet finger in the wind' approach to the metrics and timing of getting products to market. I would be interested in hearing what Eileen has to say about this as she will have the necessary feel for this given here marketing experience.

Turning to SP, the progress of income generation will be NRE, licensing and then Royalties. Items 1 and 2 is what will happen in 2015. Additionally, to my mind any ambitious CEO worth his salt wishing to leap frog the opposition without having to invest $10 billion in R&D will be cracking the whip in his company and breaking down the nice shiny new door of AM's Silicon Valley Office. The build up starts with partner and customer annoucements and will take time but we as investors will see the benefits start to rack up much sooner than your post implies.

I'm sorry Harry but your gloomy view of progress to market may be centred in the realities of the past but not in the brave new dawn of POET Technology Inc's disruptive technology.

with regards,

sulasailor