I wanted to comment on Leb's post (that was recommended by 20 readers) much earlier, but did not have the opportunity, and now I see it has caused a bit of debate and some hard feelings.

I have to say, I've only listened to about a third of the recorded AGM so far - frankly, i get that far and fall asleep, honestly.  Not that it wasn't interesting, it was, but those things put me to sleep!!  I will try to finish it in the next day or two!

Historically, I generally agree with and support Leb's positions, but I think he's sounding too negative a note here.

Here's the reason - Poet has been and very much remains a speculative investment - there are times when I think that is forgotten.  The kind of stuff that has happened along the long and winding road is the kind of stuff that typically happens to these kinds of companies.  I posted about a million or so times in the last couple of months that based on the share price and volume, whatever was coming, wasn't going to be something good that was going to happen soon.  Delay was written all over the trading.  That should not have come as a big surprise.

So now they announce the delay, making it official, but try to explain it in depth.  I'm not sufficiently tech savvy to know if their explanation makes sense.

Leb states, "I continue to find POET's financial management devious at best." 

I felt that was an overstament, but contained a sentiment that more than a few here share. An example of perhaps partial truth might be the part about the buyer taking on the expenses of POET for the last two months of the year - my guess is that, if the second tranche is paid and the buyers remain fully committed to the takeover of DL, the amounts spent by the buyer will be credited toward the balance of the purchase price.  That may have been answered while I slept. LOL  I also was a bit skeptical about the difficulty in getting regulatory approval for the buyers.  I continue to believe that the buyers want as long a runway as possible, to see if the "major player" spoken about at length during at least the first third of the AGM is satisfied with the OI for their purposes.

Do we think that the major player brought in the consortium, or that the consortium brought in the major player or that they acted independantly?  I hope the latter and here's why.  The speculation on POET is all about how well the OI works - well, we have opinions on this board, highly biased, and not all based on sufficient knowledge to make those opinions reliable.  We have the opinions of management, but they are surely biased.  

But we have the opinion of the consortium that surely had high tech consultants analyze the tech very, very carefully, and, if independent, we have a major player that has spent a whole lot of time and money on seeing if this tech can hunt.  They, too, must have a feeling the tech can be very successful.  Those opinions mean a lot to me, and help me to rationalize my investment and tell me that the risk/reward element is fully intact. Will the shot that the consortium and the major player have given POET turn out to be right?  Who knows, let's not forget, for example, that even drugs that Amgen proposes get shot down all the time.  But if Amgen proposes 15-20 drugs and 3 or 4 of them hit, they are probably big winners.  We have one shot at this point, the OI, and it could be viewed as positively as any drug ever proposed by Amgen was viewed by Amgen and still could be shot down.  The difference is, of course, the effect of going 0 for 1 when you only have 1.

I sold about 15% of my shares on Friday morning (west coast time), not because I was planning on buying them back cheaper, but because I thought it prudent after some of the early comments on this board regarding the presentation.  On my first "sale" I hit the buy button instead - the order filled immediately at a decent price and that was a hell of an unwanted surprise!!!  Age sucks!!  I was more careful with my next few "sell" orders!

Once I finally finish listening to the presenatation, I may buy them back, but, truthfully, I am still overweight with the darn stuff!!  I'm in no particularly hurry, I think the price won't move too much either way, until the deal closes/doesn't close by October 31, then, if it does, the amount of money which passed hands in the first tranche.  The first trance amount could be a mover either way, and, of course, not closing or postponing again would have a negative impact on share price.  

The ultimate go/no go decision of our major player customer is HUGE.  Best of luck to us!