Would the actual issue of patents be considered a proof point. If so we do have quite a few of them. They can be powerful and many companys would issue a NR to announce these accomplishments. It is really no small feat and adds value to the company. We have become used to it but only because we have exceptional Folks working on it, the good Dr. Taylor, et al. In such a new field it might be relativley wide open to swoop in and patent basic elements, i.e. parts and processes, used in our systems. All good stuff but kind of unique.

Also I think Peter Copetti had the insight and determination to keep POET alive when it was struggling early on, and might have had a whole different, weaker, structure were it not for him. I think PC lead the company to its highest potential. It could have been reduced to a compete buy-out/sale or exclusivley IP deals, but would not have been kept whole, and therefore diminished the position POET is now ready to occupy. An actual product producing enitey (soon), with IP most likely available too, but not its sole revenue sourse. The company had to evolve, and Peter lead the way and it certainly looks like it was the right direction to take as we will soon see. I think we owe a big thank you to Peter Copetti. Isn't he the one who brought Ajit on board. GOOD LUCK TO ALL the LONGS, and this post has been my opinion and the first part a question, combined with opinion a little bit. Nice postings lately, most of them anyway. Thanks on that. We're getting closer to our goal. Lots of intrigue along the way. I am optimistic. Peace BT