@Quan,

I'm conflicted about the PP. Obviously they needed the money and that's all that really needs to be said.

Beyond that here are the facts and possibilities as I see them.

POET proabably wanted to wrap this up quickly as you pointed out and if they priced the PP after a run it may have led to a long drawn out process.

What I don't get is what do they mean when they say the deal was price protected? How long was this in the works? It doesn't seem like there was any urgency at all, otherwise they would have done the PP back when 50 wasn't such a deal.

I might then say that they wanted the PP out of the way so they could get a run after some important announcments, but like others have said, why not wait until after the good news and get $5M after the run with less dilution?

I'm really confused about this for the reasons above and more. I think we might find out in time, but for now all that happened is that the momentum was killed and we got $5M.

@terafly,

apologies for my rage last night, I shouldn't post when I'm already angry. My opinion about the sustainability of a SP in the 80s remains unchanged even with the arguments I have read. However, I agree that there was momentum that will take time to rebuild. Regardless, nothing compares to the gains I expect when we get some real news, which IMO will make the argument about the recent 84 close moot. We will run through that, and stick the landing.