I appreciate the change in your stance but in no way does it validate your earlier positions. The results we see now only buttresses the point we have been making since. The management knew exactly what they were doing, hence the reason they ignored you all along. I for one, had faith in their strategy which is yielding positive results that we all see today. Contrary to your opinion of shipping cameras overseas and getting boots on the ground (a strategy most of us concluded was not cost effective for management), instead management opted for overseas distributor channels and partnerships (which is different from just shipping cameras to prospective overseas customers for trials - your own idea). Most of us also concluded management will rather consolidate the Australian market and get govt validation (via govt contracts) which will be a good foundation or launch pad for overseas expansion. Consolidate local market, achieve financial stability, seek market expansion in that order. The chairmanship appointment was not your idea so the MD appointment couldn't have been your idea either. We don't even know who hunted Gerard. Management received so much disparagement for not chasing your cannabis leads but focusing on Shark warning systems (your perception though). The results we see today were not done overnight. Previous news releases always stated several trials were ongoing.....the results are evident today. Again, the management have always known what they were doing. SP is not always a true reflection of the performance of a company. It could lead or lag performance.
In my opinion, you became frustrated from SP crash and got impatient with management. Nothing to do with non-performance of management.
