Mayl, you of course are correct regarding the substantial...

Mayl, you of course are correct regarding the substantial dilution from the Feb capital raise and yes in many respects it is very much a disappointment to most shareholders.
However there are a few other aspects that I believe could have influenced the board's (not just Oleg's) decision to accept the full amount.

One of these would be the situation where an interested purchaser would look not only at the tech involved but also ask the question as to whether the supplier, DRO, would be around in 1, 2, 5, or even 10 years time particularly where some competitors are multi billion, long established companies. This aspect of course would be pretty vital where the systems being purchased will require long term technical support including where the customer has entered into a SAAS arrangement. Plus of course we have to consider DRO's main suppliers of the various parts on contract. They certainly would want to know the DRO as purchaser would be able to honour it's commitments.
Of course any prospective purchaser would almost certainly look at the financial strength or otherwise of the vendor, here I guess I'm asking the question as to whether the additional cash from the over subscription in February would make a difference?

Also to be fair to DRO they really did not have a firm idea of what 2023 held in the way of firm orders and thus the need to build up a very substantial amount of stock in hand.
Yes with the benefit of rear vision mirrors they could have held off taking the huge over subscription and if necessary raised again if needed but what good are rear vision mirrors?

regards, EB