In view of how many millions of dollars the compan

In view of how many millions of dollars the company has "spent" while being completely idle, I think we've already seen Heddle's last big play come and go.

I can't help but conclude that Heddle put in some millions of dollars as a loan only as a ploy to trick the investing public that he was committed to the company, and believed in the value of its technology. What else could he have done or said that would have made a more powerful statement to potential investors? This served both to prop up the price of the stock, and to convince a few more saps to make private investments.

After Heddle put his money in and raised whatever he possibly could privately, he proceeded to remove every penny that he or anyone else put into the company, under line items he could call "SG&A".

It simply doesn't pass the laugh-test that he had to spend $4.5M on SG&A for a completely idle company. All he had to do, according to his own story, was to spend a few hundred $K of that pile of cash to fix a processor and run it for a few days, to trigger an event that would have made money rain down on the company and its shareholders.

I think it's clear that unlike Bordynuik, Heddle doesn't believe in risking money and wasting time on props, such as processors and employees. If he wasn't willing so far to spend the small amount needed to get the processors working, I don't believe we're going to see it. Heddle showed us that he would rather have an extra few hundred $K in the pocket, than invest the time and effort required to get a complicated prop up and running.

In the 10Q he said he's out of money and can't afford to do anything but continue to sit completely idle, just as he has done for the past two years. If he couldn't raise significant money on the hype over his making personal loans of millions of dollars to the company, he surely can't raise it now.

I honestly don't see what more Heddle can do or say now that wouldn't be so over the top as to guarantee SEC intervention. He can try to find investors who will privately buy more shares at greatly discounted prices. But how much money could he really raise if he were, for example, to offer shares privately at $0.01 with a six month restriction? Only peanuts to be made while taking great risk on a stock that just doesn't have the liquidity to make such things worthwhile.

I think we're likely to see this stock trade around $0.05 until that next 10Q. If I correctly recall, that is the price at which private investors last paid the company for piles of discounted shares.