Whilst the exact staff count at POET eludes me I feel it is safe to say that the figures are low (20 or so). This fact has been a cause for concern for me because I find it difficult to understand how the company expects to cover the panoply of tasks necessary to move mountains. Is this not a risk?

My explanation to myself and those I brief on POET's Progress, is that it envisages close collaboration with others who have the necessary resources to drive progress. How otherwise, could the rapid interest as envisaged by Eileen take place be handled efficiently on such small staff levels. Thst said if indeed the company is on the cusp of such agreements then somewhere (SV) an army of lawyers is being kept busy. I should really examine the financial returns to see how funds allocated to legal matters have grown in the financial returns.

Again, looking at the model provided in President's DD for IP licensing, one can see that both the management of IP and the collaborative agreements could allow the company once the die is set to continue management with a relatively small hi quality team.

A cosequece would be a highly profitable IP and research company with high dividend potential.

So much more is going on in the background that is not being revealed but I for one feel the recent additions to the board and TRAB herald changes unforeseen.

Sula