One Buffet principle I've always liked is "invest in a business that is so wonderful that an idiot can run them. Because sooner or later, one will."  I appreciate as a (essentially) pre-revenue start-up with novel, game-changing tech we need to make certain adjustments to Buffet's approach.  We're not a big blue chip with product legacy and industry momentum.  That said, given our very precarious current situation, the fallback mentality of "it's going to be fine, I put my trust in Suresh" is an unsound position to take, perhaps even antithetical to our purpose.

Suresh is undeniably a revered photonics industry rockstar deserving all acclaim and respect for his technological contributions.  No question.  However, at a certain point (now) we need to distinguish investing in the invention vs. the man.  Once he navigated the tech pivot some years ago (brilliant, clutch move) and committed to the product path we're now on, the "man" should become increasingly less relevant as the value of the invention blooms and bears fruit.  (Yes, there is future value potential for additional product development and value-add etc. but let's focus on primary building blocks here that will keep us 1) alive, and 2) enjoying a financial return.)

The defense of 'nobody has what Poet offers' is only relevant if the business is on solid financial footing.  Buffet said in a 2010 interview "If you've got a good enough business, if you have a monopoly...you know, your idiot nephew could run it. And if you've got a really good business, it doesn't make any difference".  My point is if we're so singular in our offering and have the missing key for what industry desperately needs, then trust and faith in 'the man' at some stage becomes a false premise.

- Proof of the invention's value (as a technophile) is rightfully bewildering and exciting for those enamored with step change in technology and an academic/lab focus.

- Proof of the invention's value (as an investor) is shown to us every weekday from 9:30am - 4:00pm.

Neither are refutable, yet we continue year after year conflating these perspectives and talking past each other.  The holy grail won't do us any good stranded in the desert without water to fill it.  It doesn't mean the grail itself is less holy or the reputation of its protagonist is changed.