Yes I hear you Baba. Without going deep into your frame of mind which most of us have endured I will just address the report that I linked.

I read through what was available (for free) and noted that they do back check and report on the level of accuracy of previous years projections which were based on "the trend" and data provided by the companies within the report. And from recollection the silicon photonics growth failed to meet projections. SiPh fell short. And my impression was that it was not related to the need but more associated with failure to meet technical and economic expectations. 

I do think that the information provided in these reports are very much used by industry as one input into their roadmaps for decision making.

In short these reports amount to data mining. Is gut feel involved? Probably not but apparently that sometimes works.

What I will say is that Suresh was very correct in his decision to embark on a path that would utilize InP based solutions as the next generation of photonic active devices. And I don't think it was gut feeling but many (including insiders) were wondering what he was up to.

I think the man is very objective and is ahead of the curve. I think he is going to take us to the promised land.