ocu-mix, page-15

The ATM was there to be used, Indijo. Would you rather it got tapped at far lower prices resulting in far greater dilution?

I'd rather he talked it up and got the result, than talked it down, or not talked at all. Imagine the teeth gnashing and wailing if that happened.

And we're not talking about "some sort of agreement." Read the statement again. We're talking supply agreements in place across every platform by year's end.

So what if it's taking longer? It was 'guidance' given with what was fcats as they were known at the time. Has it occurred to anyone here that the initial agreements as anticipated may have been delayed for good reason? Being that the clients may like what they see so much they've decided to expand the scope of the agreements, as has been intimated?

Seriously.

Scramble to get out one small development agreement for one molecule to keep a few disgruntled shareholders happy, or take a while longer, expand the scope of the agreement and lock it in for the long-term benefit of all shareholders.

One molecule at $3-5 million a year, or ten molecules at $3-5 Million a year?

Let me think about that for a minute.

No need.

No brainer.