I gave you a thumbs up for that one Aves...good to see people here showing some spark of excitment about the future despite the share price...well done. And Junkers I like the way you think.

A very good response BCD and really nothing needs to be added.

I would suggest that the market has rarely been a good indicator of actual status of development for POET. The stock traded as high as $3 prior to the Empire club. Certainly the opposite can be true. The share price for POET has always been about sentiment. And the sentiment right now has a big trust issue.

There is no way to qualify what stage they are at with the VCSEL and full integration. At one time news of Applied Materials people installing equipment at DL would have been enough to generate share price interest. 

Instead we apparently get pictures of the San Jose office as some sort of indicator?

Trust can be re-established by good communications and share price performance can be re-established by reporting positive results.

Disco that is going to be a very insightful panel discussion indeed. It is interesting to note (and no I can't provide a source) that a POET optical engine (just the chip) is ball parked at $4 per die. As we know thousands of die can be produced from one wafer...that comment was made publicly in a CC. So if POET was to produce a 100g transceiver the cost should be significantly lower than the targeted $0.25/Gbps optics @ $0.04/Gbps per die (X2 for end to end communications) plus submount cost.

The key to reaching the required price points is wafer level monolithic integration and testing. That is what POET is about and is should enable the lowest cost point in the industry.

Not really grasping at straws. Just trying to gain some understanding of what the TRAB was. I don’t think we can pretend it did not happen? Also if we look at what generated the start of this thread it was a discussion around a Heptagon patent for a transparent screen. It is suspected that Heptagon’s biggest customer is Apple. Heptagon’s earnings are primarily from one big customer who Heptagon has never referenced by name. An example of a confidential agreement required by Apple. So why didn’t Apple buy Heptagon? That company was acquired by AMS to gain a bigger foothold with Apple.

http://www2.bryangarnier.com/images/updates/MorningMail/MM_ams_2016_10_26.pdf

It is interesting to note that Heptagon’s solution is heterogeneous and not monolithic.

POET is a public company and as such they do have to advise shareholders of product development. So I do believe they will advise us of meaningful progress towards the alpha prototype. And I do believe that the alpha prototype will generate NRE as has been stated by the current management team.

In the meantime lets watch them grow the DL business.

The original question was whether POET could be applied to a transparent screen. I think the answer is yes it could used to provide the optical engine for that display. But as ark has pointed out it is likely way too soon for a POET optical engine to be used at that kind of scale. But the future is bright.

So I think maybe the question then becomes (with a wide margin of assumption) of possible reasons for the TRAB to have been dissolved:

1... The direction of product design for an Apple product has been established.

2... Apple is no longer interested in POETs technology. That is a hard one to accept given what we know of the potential for POET to do many applications that Apple would want.

3...Potentially POET is formally distancing themselves from Apple for strategic reasons.

a. If POET is going to sell products to Apples competition then the association with Apple had to be ended.

b. Apple is getting too close for comfort as POET progresses towards full integration. Could they have been waiting for some proof of concept with the intent to take a run at POET once they felt that the technology was derisked? In fact if you take this one step further it is in keeping with public disclosure policy now.