I think the point is that saying 'coming weeks' for 6 months demonstrates incapacity.
Whatever the intended inference of the vague guideance, its clearly now demonstrably incorrect. I suspect (well at least hope) that management may have originally thought a couple of weeks to two months and that that has blown out due to reasons suggested... Otherwise you'd say 'coming months' right?
However, given
1) The degree of the inaccuracy
2) The 'failed' reinforcement of 'coming weeks'
3) The lack of substantiation of rationale for guideance
4) The obvious potential for the above to be interpreted as indifference, especially after reiteration subsequent to acknowledgement of SH concern/appetite for clarity
Shareholders to Lux's point must at some point question the situation. As I carried on about the other day, the uncertainty leads to potentially damaging speculation. Not just to the buy/sell/ hold decision of retail SH, but also to BIT, and hence the viability of the technology and outcome.
I dont think we're there yet, but without a genuine substantation of the status the delay etc 'soon', ultimately the removal of management process has to commence. Noise, EGM, whatever.
Its been a while reaching this conclusion for me and frankly its not one I like. It ran through my mind pre quarterly, I read the it and thought 'The answers in here'. I still do. I still think management are in a tough position wrt what they can reasonably say re results, and I still believe they're good. BUT....per above bcs the original guideance is so incredibly incorrect, the updated guidance presents as obtuse, intentionally maybe?
Hence we head to the moderate speculative position...leading with empathetic courtesy.
Why is management so incapable of recognising the issue here ? Do they recognise it and are otherwise wonderfully preoccupied? They've acknowledged its required and bizarrely replied with same - is it an EQ concern, with a board in situ, you'd think someone would have the capacity to anticipate the ramifications of what could reasonably be considered baiting SHs? Is the behaviour a result of frustration with emails and requests for information, is it a verbtum presentation of what has been presented by the CRO? Is it all being dragged out intentionally so negotiations can be had with BP and a offer presented concurrent with results... somehow, for some reason ?
Moving deeper into the assessment of lack of capacity the underlying issue as has been raised here before, is that the solution sought by SH here is not only overdue, its not complex... and the issue has arisen as a result of original incorrect guideance issued by management.
Annoyingly, if not rectified soon, not only will it pose issues for BIT, but it will also take the gloss off any good results. Part of the reason why I think about what the accurate value of world changing results are here.
Ever have to tell your kids not to jump out of a moving car as they seek to rush off with excess haste?
dyor
Well summed up.
Expand
(20min delay)