Thank you for your kind response, Baboriley. Further optimization is simply part of the process. You need to remind yourself that POET is not developing/fine tuning alone. POET is co-developing. Most of the work has already been done by POET. Now it is just a matter of two partners in each instance combining resources, expertise, and engineering to tailor the technology to products that the customer wants. Remember, Suresh boldly said a few years ago that there is no point to produce what customers do not want. 

We learned that customers want the whole GaAs monolithically and not as discrete products. So it is all or nothing for that platform as it stands. In the InP platform discrete products are desired by customers. So, hence, the agreements to co-develop and/or partner in some cases is sooner to reality of monetization (hence, plan B).

Now, we are used to falling short because of the disappointments in the GaAs platform, but in the InP platform and interposing with silicon, POET is not disappointing anyone. It is the exact opposite. There is nothing to say that POET won't optimize with customers to something better than imagined or conceived anymore. To me, blue sky not only in the packaging, but the fact that through optics on wavelengths, POET is now 'agnostic'. This opens up all kinds of avenues of new and better technologies to co-develop with companies. They will come to POET because POET's work can help accelerate their development and improve bottom lines. As for disappointing in the InP platform in terms of more research-problem-based optimization rather than just moving forward with productive solutions-based optimization, POET and their co-development partners probably know by now what to avoid and to stay focussed on optimizing proven areas of technology that is soonest to bring in finanicial return.

Monolithic