There were a bunch of colossally stupid mistakes made by our...

There were a bunch of colossally stupid mistakes made by our then management team. Rookie errors that the DIASource management were more than happy to take advantage of. I don’t blame them, I just don’t trust them. ​

Yes but why not put our team under scrutiny?

The rookie error from Diasource POV would have to be our gross overestimates of ADO future revenue. Surely? All the rest is our problem, not theirs.

So Diasource IMO acted like any commercial operator would act. The acted in their own interests. They weren't bound to see the agreement through when they figured they didn't need us as much as they were convinced earlier by what must have been pie-in-the sky figures. Why else would they have taken us on in the first place? Think about it.

Meanwhile you imagine that Diasource should have bankrolled ADO and waited while we struggled? That's not a rookie error, it's misguided in the extreme to expect them to continue to do it.

They were already paying for our takeover of them...how happy would they have been that no deals showed up or looked like showing up? We weren't going to have a positive impact on their bottom line for ages. Certainly not even if they adopted our technology. It would have been incremental and slow. We couldn't pay our own way. We were overbloated and overblown to the blazes. Even Joe Maeji could see that by this last AGM. They shut us down so as to avoid the continual bleed of money. This seems clear to me.

Nobody has challenged this commercial logic so far. It just comes down to hunches, beliefs or feelings?
We're just afraid? We don't trust? Well I'm afraid Diasource was far better run than ADO.

You refer to Bouris understanding how critical the deal was, but he was apparently AWOL in financing or governance at any stage prior. He was just winging it, IMO in case his options came good.

For this reason I believed he should go. Howls of disapproval hailed down on me, but so it came to pass. I think Bouris may have capitulated because he could see trouble on the horizon and he didn't see himself as being part of the solution.

Meanwhile nobody seems to want to hold GC and RM to account who were in situ during the critical period.

How did RM get so many shares? I've asked this and many related questions in previous posts.

Who wants to talk about these issues?

So RM can't have been opportunistic, it's only RS would could be?



I will be blunt: who could blame Diasource for the outcome except for a one-eyed angry ADO holder with a sense of entitlement?

And it seems there are plenty of them in here. It's tribal.

Commercial reality doesn't get a look-in? OK. We're special because we've got this special glue and other businesses who we overreach and try to take over should be grateful for the opportunity to bankroll our takeover and beyond. It just doesn't bear close scrutiny.

IMO this business of Diasource allegedly being after our IP is a red herring. How do you think this dastardly deed is going to occur?

Giving us $6mil in a timely final settlement unwinding the 'takeover' isn't progress toward that dastardly end, is it? If RS is there to block any progress towards solvency and huge funds, why does he actively back our moves into the battery space?


I think Rolf S is convinced of the battery space. He is a legal generalist, his background isn't in diagnostics.

I think he probably understands good governance too. Something rather boring and legalistic but which perhaps everyone in here could usefully turn their minds to IMO.

BTW, is it really necessary to drag up controversy over a long previous AGM? Seriously. It's annoying being misinterpreted. Over and over.​

​

What you miss:​

I wanted to get rid of RM for the conflict of interest and shambles of a financial situation, and there was hardly any appetite for it from the HC crowd.​

All the rest is detail and a considerable amount of pettiness. But amazingly enough he did indeed go. What is behind that? Nobody is talking.​

​

It seems more likely that the tribe thinks GC and RM are above accountability, because they're needed to fend off an (extremely doubtful) attack on our IP? This is regardless of the commercial realities.

What do you think this is all going to look like to a potential partner?


It seems inevitable we will all be hit with a reality check soon.

The fact that ADO is seeking legal advice is surely significant.