Tada - I only answered some questions that people asked. I don't think they are going under (I sure hope not) but people were asking what if. What I will say is that fire sale is a lot less than $1 billion. That is just getting a lot less than it is worth, while fire sale can be a lot less than that. During the financial crisis, I saw companies with good new products that had just lined up customer contracts for long term viability and only needed 6 months of bridge financing to get there but could not get that at that time so went under. I have seen companies with lots of assets to sell to give back a not good but okay portion of investor's value but in CCAA, the kind of people (EY, etc.) I mentioned frittered it away and they got what was left. That is why I was discouraging that as an option but I agree that this should never have to go there.

You referred to the situation last November like it is the same now. We have no idea what it is now. I gave some numbers at Jan.31 and we have not raised the numbers needed to cover what we burn and need more to proceed ahead further. It might be coming, I am only saying that it is needed and soon but time keeps passing without it and the debts get bigger. It can't go forever without some action. There is no fearmongering here. It is just facts that we need to face. You state that $5 million has been raised in the last 5 months, a fair stretch as it is only $2.56 million raised that has been announced. They burned almost $5 million in the three months to Jan. 31 and have two more months of burn since. Maybe that is getting closer to $8 million burned and $2.56 million raised. That is why we are asking what is happening behind the scenes as what we are told does not work. They still keep operating so credit to them but many investors would not be comfortable with that and probably anyone investing in distributions now is getting told how they are doing it but we aren't. You can't blame people for looking at the facts released to us and questioning it while you take it on blind faith. They are not fearmongering and that wasn't fair of you to claim that. Talk of being totally secure because of a couple of major partners is fine as long as they stay true but it would not be the first time a partner put a squeeze on fellow partners to take something over. Looking through the financials, it can be seen where they are cutting back on inventories, using up prepaid deposits, etc. to keep the payables where it was. Assets cut over $1 million. That is good management but doesn't cover the shortfall and can only be done so long. There has to be something else behind the scenes that is making it work so far. 

As far as me, I am still totally behind them but would like answers. I will admit that I am much more worried than I was before the COVID-19 and associated financial crisis hit us. That is not planting seeds of doubt. That is dealing with reality. If RVX has a solution to get through it, I will feel more comfortable once they reveal it.