I'm seeing this a little differently than some, apparently.  I don't see our agreement to reduce the purchase price as a quid pro quo for Poet's ability to do the Sanan deal, I believe (hope) we had that right all along (maybe our rights to do outside deals expanded a little in return for the reduction in price?).  In fact, if somehow the Sanan deal would materiallyl impinge on DL's future plans vis a vis the OI, then why would the DL buyers let us off so cheaply, after all they did pay a bunch of money for DL, and both sides were very public about how the deal would be synergistic to both parties going forward.  

I have been under the impression since the DL deal was first announced that the principal item the Consortium was counting on was the contractual obligation of both parties to do OI related business with one another once the deal was closed and a factory was equiped.

Could it be that the real crux of the DL deal was just what the Consortium got - ownership of DL without any claim or interest in the OI tech?  And that any business relationship with Poet going forward was not contractually required but only on a "we'll both use commercially reasonable efforts to make it happen" basis?  I hope that wasn't the intention going in, as it wouldn't say much for the value that POET was to bring to any such relationship via its OI tech.

So, at this point, I believe the relationship with DL has a future, and for those who don't think so, please explain why the Consortium paid all that money to Poet for DL less the OI.