Dear Rainer,
Why then do you give PET a circle in you Ven diagram?
Franky all this ven business is academic nonsence. I suppose what I want to get over is that the 18 months of work dedicated to PET by PTI, Synopsys and BAE for a customer has not fizzled away so that people here do not discount the possibility of a deal with that customer simply because management have a new operational focus on a POET product.
By your own definition of POET, PET products can be produced as a subset, so electrical only products are as much a reality as optical based POET products. Who is to say they will not be the dominant source of income to PTI in the future?
The impression I get from your statements is that PET is dead and the deal with the customer who defined the PET Milestones is off and that we are now only looking at VCSEL. Since it was the same customer who defined the VCSEL. Management may have realised that its use for datacentres is the nearest goal that demonstrates the voracity of POET IP and the money is to be made from manufaturing it is key regardless of what the customer specifies. On the other hand Synopsys software will promote different PET products developed on license by other customers, which could scale up to something producing very significant income. Meanwhile buiding VCSEL proves the company's newly found manufacturing skills to the world of doubters and the misinformed and may impress the customer and attact others.
I like this scenario better than PET is not an option anymore.
as ever,
Robert
