It's not an exaggeration...it's my opinion based on my perception of things. In this context, as in all contexts, risk is relative, it is never an absolute.

My statement is no more an exaggeration than your theoretical argument/statement that every investment has risk. If you take that all-or-none stance, we never get to discuss/debate the merits of my perception of "completely de-risked" versus your perception of the same - which is obviously different, and may be quite interesting.

Therefore, I ask, what would it take for you to consider Poet to be completely de-risked? And, you cannot say "when they have revenue and the SP goes up" because then we are no longer talking about relative risk....it's not risk if there is not the possibility that something bad or negative will happen.