Hey Brick, I don't hold it against you that you it

Hey Brick, I don't hold it against you that you italicized actually as if that was going to discredit me. Instead of selectively just listing what he "actually" said since you were in such a rush, why don't you take a few seconds and also paste what he said about a 2:1 and not being able to do a disproportionate RS as an example to qualm fears of additional dilution. But instead, you chose to just highlight stuff he also talked about that I did not mention, rather than talking about the underlying problem.

If he burns through another 700m and we are sitting at 1.5b we are going to need more authorized shares. Is this something shareholders should feel comfortable about when he "actually" says the same thing over for the reason why he needs them? He did an awful lot of talking about not using them for dilution when the issue was raised before the ASM. Maybe you do not remember..I don't know? It was a hot topic about him using the additional 1b, and over and over he said he wasn't.

Yes, I understand you need shares for day to day and implementation of strategic moves. However, he spent an awful lot of time trying to reassure people he would not be using them.

Also, I'm not a big fan of using cash from diluted shares to continuous push back deadline dates of deals. It is just cash burned, unless he truly has non dilutive funding in the works (grant, rev, dx cash generation).