Let's parse your claim of "Zero feedstock issues -

Let's parse your claim of "Zero feedstock issues -- from IR"...

We are confident that we've resolved the feedstock issues that we had in Q3 and we are anticipating getting multiple machines producing, cutting costs, and increasing sales to meet our goal of cash-flow positive. Feedstock supply is not currently a bottleneck for us and we're working on maintaining and procuring the right feedstock.

The feedstock issues that were seen in Q3 were related to contaminated feedstock that required the machine(s) to be shut down while the issue was addressed.

"Feedstock supply is not currently a bottleneck for us" does not mean it will not be a bottleneck with three machines capable of running at capacity.  It only means that it is not a bottleneck for the amount of time they are currently able to process.  Which, as we all know, has not been a lot.

I am talking about real commercial processing.  24/7 processing.  4,000 lbs. per hour processing.

These are the claims.  I would be thrilled to see them hitting their original 2,000 lbs. per hour claims.

I was at the AGM.  It is correct to say that the paying for feedstock had to do with pre-processed feedstock. That makes a lot of business sense.  It is easier to ship preprocessed feedstock and the cost of processing is shifted.  There will probably be a premium, but it should not be a huge cost.

But I also heard Tony Bogolin say that finding good sources of feedstock is not easy.  Tony Bogolin is the CFO.  If he says it is not easy I tend to believe it.

Which throws a huge question mark at your "zero feedstock issues" claim.