I'm a believer in the power of collaboration and like this approach, so quick Q for you SoT: Who do you think built these relationships and put these collaborations in place? My thoughts would be Watt and Hopkins - rather than the board per se. IF that is the case, then how robust are they without those two - although clearly Watt still has some involvement.
As to the PC for Dummies notion, sure the goal is to produce an amazing data pack and get millions in backing. Hopefully they will, but if they've hollowed out the science dept then who's going to lead it in the next stage? Maybe they pick someone up with their millions..?..but prima facie, without lead scientists and a CEO it feels like a shell ready to offload. Personally, I'd rather they develop the science further and improve the value proposition as that's where the value may be, but that also depends on timing to reach such inflextion points. Clearly it's all spec as we get little information from the Chairwoman, whose first promise to shareholders was to improve communications, but it's a slow game, so patience is a prerequisite. Unfortunately that doesn't always marry up with wanting to get a decent return on investment over a reasonable timeframe.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)