Hi Kent, I suppose we all learn by experience. And, we each have a different threshold for pain (and forgiveness). The problems I have with Vyta's management are addressed in your post, although I would probably define them in different terms. When an investor becomes something more than just casual with any one company, the perception of management and the commercial entity itself become one. Paul and Vyta are one in the eyes of most investors, just as he was with Intercell and Nanopierce. I am not a lawyer, so I don't want to talk absolutes. After Nanopierce, and all the way up through the Brunetti deal, I followed the spoken and written communication of management. I also thought I had developed a pretty effective filter. But, over time, my comfort level decreased, as did the credibility of management. It became clear to me that things were being said which I didn't consider honest. Of course, there is a difference between what may be legal in our society, and that which we choose to trust because of our beliefs. I no longer trust what management says, or implies. Our perspectives are different. Now the only thing that matters is what shows up on Vyta's bottom line. We'll have to wait and see if Vyta ever really has what it takes to become a commercial success. And, regarding underestimating the cost of getting the Biogra venture up and running... I haven't heard anyone take responsibility for those mistakes. There are a lot of excuses... but, not accountability. I suppose that's what you get when you have so many different people involved. I have gradually become a skeptic. Until the business proves itself, I believe potential investors need to weigh the speculative nature of the business against the track record of management. To ignore the past would be a grave mistake, at least in my opinion. Jeff