I liken what happened to renovating a home, something I have experienced first hand several times.
You buy the house with grandiose plans to make alterations, some major, some minor. The ultimate goal is a nicer/better house. Upon demolition/inspection of the parts you want to change, you realize it will take more money and time than originally planned. This is never a pleasant experience. BUT, rather than leaving it in its demo'ed and unseemly condition, you have to spend (or borrow) more money to keep it on track.
I'm with FJ; I don't think the $0.36/$0.52 reflects POET's value, it simply represents what the financiers could get away with.
I believe mgmt. still has the grandiose vision, they just needed extra financing (and maybe exposure to the US market) to get there.
However, I have firmly asked IR (demanded, really) that POET mgmt. explain this move, and have the courage to take questions about their explanations. So far all I got was the proforma answer, "POET is aware of shareholder discontent."
D
