Yes, I agree 100% with you on your post Flec. Great to see...

Yes, I agree 100% with you on your post Flec.

Great to see another presentation hitting the airwaves. PH presented as far more polished but it was a little too obvious that it appeared David was feeding him the questions that he had been asked to prepare for. That's ok, it worked and that is all that matters I guess.

It is nice to see clear 'expected' time lines laid out for us (if all goes well). Such is my PTSD aversion to surprises I would like to have heard something from DM or PH about what risks there are post a successful PL6 and how significant those risks are moving forward ??? also hear about their confidence level in their ability to successfully work defeat those challenges.

I have the distinct impression they are not sure what new technology is coming (from outside of the ReRAM space). DM says it is now a race to develop the technology to solve the bottlenecks and enable AI processing to work more efficiently and effectively / full capacity and ' as far as they know'. there is no imminent competition.

Worryingly, it appears David hasn't learned his lessons (on a few fronts). I find it particularly disturbing that after spruiking what he believed was a realistic capitalisation figure already of $1 Billion after the PL4 success he is now making predictions about what the shares should be worth post a successful PL6 !!! It appears that despite a success representing a massive positive de-risk and advancement..... he now believes it will be with much less than after his valuation opinion after PL4 !!! ie..... low teens now !!!! Brilliant !!! I wish he wouldn't throw around numbers / guesses like that. Not least it sets a low bar for potential investors who would hear David say these things and think 'well the Chairman only thinks it is worth this much'. This feeds into my opinions about David having no clue about what the company IP is really worth. So I worry about the eventual negotiations (should we be successful and the very low threshold that triggers the 'sales bonus pool', and what recommendations will follow from DM in terms of what is a fair price to accept. .

It would be enough and far more prudent if David just says there should be a significant re-rate on success of PL6 without putting a figure on it. People here talk about the sorts of things that handicap our share price ......... this is yet another example of the statements that matter to potential investors and can have a very negative impact on attracting investors. Even back in May' 24 'Lodge Partners' were commissioned to provide a valuation report that put a valuation on 4DS of $0.61 cents........ so much more has happened since then. I for one would be very disappointed if the PL6 success only brought us back to the low teens in terms of SP.

All this said, we are heading in the right direction with the technology and all we can do is wait with a good dose of 'hopium'. There is a lot of water to pass under this bridge yet, but we should never minimalist or discount the amazing success so far with this technology from what is after all a micro-company with very limited resources.