I have had you on ignore for a long time until recently so have...

I have had you on ignore for a long time until recently so have not had any reason to respond to you before recent times.

Please don't take this response personally personally, but I think your antagonism towards AKP is bordering on the obsessive. It means - or should mean - absolutely nothing to you whether this company succeeds or fails, because you have no skin in its game. Or at least you say so. Yet you are clearly antagonistic to anyone who disagrees with you over AKP or PET, and presumably over Fred Bart, the chairman of both. Both stocks seem to be the only ones you have posted on for a very long time.

So if any of its investors end up being hurt by AKP's possible failure that is really none of your business. Despite what you say, I read your cynical dismissals of anything said in its defence, or in disagreement with your opinion, as being taken as an affront to you personally. And your response shows little sign of empathy towards AKP shareholders. It is therefore logical and reasonable to presume that you would feel quite gratified if you are proved right and others proved wrong. You clearly regard that as 'anti-authoritarianism' on your part, and in a good way. I do not. If AKP goes belly up I will be hurt a lot. I will feel bad, and I will have a lot of remorse over all of the decision processes that led me to invest, and a lot of frustration that the company got itself - and me in the process - into a bad place based on a good idea. And so undoubtedly will many others who have freely and deliberately done the same.

I am happy for you to post anything on any stock that is potentially informative and helpful to others as they consider their investments. And you are entitled to hold and express any opinion you want. I have no say in the matter. If you post stuff that is destructive, slanted, and belligerent I don't give a toss really. If I don't like it I don't have to read it. The ignore button allows me to not hear your commentary or opinions.

However I do agree with you on several issues.

I do not think the company has informed its shareholders well at all for many years now over the zig-zag course of the development of its chip. I do not like that and I have said so numerous times.

It is in many ways run by its chief driving force as if it was a private company owned by its major shareholders, and run largely for their benefit. (That is not always a bad thing however.) I think the current situation is typical of that pattern, and I consider the present 'radio silence' to be reprehensible. It is, I agree, not good governance. It is an irritant to those who only get information as it is doled out to massage the public perception of what is happening. The news emphasis is always on the good things that can be said without explaining how and why the bad things happened and how their repetition will be prevented.

But that does not however mean that the company's actions have all been wrong or wrongly handled. They could have been the absolutely best decisions that could have been made given the actual situations. But rather that there is no way of knowing whether they have been good decisions or bad. That leads to suspicion and anger amongst the rank and file SH who do not get told the back story that links the whole set of announcements together. 'Shjt happens' when you are developing a new product and have to make important decisions in response to developing situations over which you have little 'real control' along with massive consequences in terms of time blowouts and cost concerns. That, in my opinion, has often been the case at AKP. I do not like the way it has been done. But that is just how things happen in reality. Investors simply have to be prepared for that. It is called risk. And without risk there will only be small rewards. I paid my money. I takes my chance.

You paid nothing. Why are you still here?