I hope to be at the AGM but if unable to do so, below is a list of questions I e-mailed to Mr. Chu. These are my legitimate concerns and hopefully wil be addressed. I would like to double down, but have been burned before.
To Dr. Taylor:
-
Congratulations on your impressive achievements. At the 2011 AGM I asked you why the major chip makers have not beaten a path to Poet’s door. Your response was “they will”. Why, in your opinion, have they not done so 3 years later?
-
At the 2011 AGM, the original run of prototype chips were displayed. At that time the problem was inability to mass produce without an unacceptably high rate of flawed chips. You stated that this was due to one of the heat related fabrication steps (which someone on the message boards for POET explained was the annealment step). Was that ever resolved , or bypassed to complete the subsequent development, and is this the step now delaying completion of the fully integrated opto-electronic chip?
To the Board:
-
What is the nature of any contractual arrangements with BAE – specifically how does paragraph 2.9 of the contract(BAE SYSTEMS and ODIS will each own an undivided 50% joint interest in Joint Intellectual Property, subject to any obligations ODIS may have to the University of Connecticut, which obligations shall only affect ODIS’ share of ownership therein.) affect ownership of the finished chip and its fabrication techniques(i.e. how much of a claim would BAE have on future revenues)? How much(if any) of the current chip qualifies as “Joint Intellectual Property”?
-
The contemplated reverse split would magnify the dilutive effect of subsequent option approvals –which would certainly be requested by future venture capitalists or partners. Management has somewhat insulated themselves from this dilution by requesting a doubling of the options allowable to them. What similar protections can you offer the retail investor?
-
Mr. Sheldon Iwantash has been nominated to the board. Since his company, Pinetree Capital owns millions of shares, the potential conflict of interest (using his position on the board to influence the value of Pinetree’s holdings or using Pinetree’s holdings to pressure decisions of the board) exists. I am in no way implying he would do this, but how would this be viewed by the SEC in ruling on a NASDAQ listing?
-
In the company’s 20-f filing, you state that after this round of SIBR funding, there is no further government funding. Future or pending government contracts are not mentioned. Are there any?
