I am not opposed to a bit of drama Morning Star, the PO was a dramatic event!  

I found both your posts educative as they have added detail and perspective to the argument and were not really deserving of FJs critisism. However, you can understand, I'm sure, that when your posts come at the tail end of a long line of posters exercising their frastration rather repetatively  but adding little that was new FJ  frastration showed and he did rather tar you with same brush, which was unfair.  His omment was I think was aimed at the thread as a whole. 

The Company decision undeniably has placed PTK in our portfolios in a bad position in our value judgement of it as an investment. Most of us are no doubt in the Red and out of profit which is never a comfortable or desirable position. For some even disasterous if they invested in the short term and are now frozen in, but enough is enough and we must move on.  That said, I think there is a question for managment aat theAGM and that is - what lessons have management learned from it and what measures will they take in the future to prevent such a damaging episode for investors again?

From my point of view I find our CEO's argument to seize the moment to correct production problems by maintaining the momentum of development at Denselight and accelerating  the commercialisation of the AOC was entirely necessary in the circumstancws and timely.  If successful this minimises the risk of it happening again.  The CEO's letter really does need to be read carefully to appreciate this and many don't seem to heed what was a fair explanationn nor absorbed the rational presented.   PTK has never been properly funded and is on a tight budget to achieve commercialisation, Lab to Fab. That clear RISK came home with a vengence but they dealt with it in the only way they could albeit seemingly clunsily and hurriedly.

 I now look forward to the progress report that the acceleration is working and revenue increasing from the AGM.

Sula