Ann: Revised Continuous Disclosure Policy, page-72

One of the differences here is the approach to risk. I think you'd better understand my position if youd had the same approach.

Its novel, very few direct competitors on this tech., Potential upside outweighs downside.

I agree we dont have as much visibility as we'd like. Ive said that all the way. Ive also argued there may be reasons aide from those suggested here for it.

I actually didn't like TSLA prior to trading it, so I did a (please excuse this phrase- its past its used by already) "deep-ish dive". One of the interesting insights that made me think of BIT when I did was the fact that (paraphrasing) when Musk introduced capital and Managerial skills to TSLA there were other potential opportunities to pursue the space with. ie Tesla was not the only EV start up around. AC propulsion was considered. I haven't looked, but where is AC propulsion now? Was their tech better? It certainly does appear to be notably up there with TSLA in lights

I suppose the point here made by myself and others is, there's clearly something novel here, putting aside historical posturing whatever. You'll try to argue there's not and thats fine. We may not yet be able to tell how good or what application that may be, due to the absence of a Musk style "Hero"

That presence in the Tesla scenario meant expertise, strategy and cash. Quelle surprise!

One of the problems with raising cash from those without the other factors is - wait for it. The potential absence of the other factors, right? Hence the strategy here is to outsource, showcase and sell, which may have some challenges.

Footmax, Duce for whatever reason want to focus on the potential for demise, you the share as a trade (generally).

As I say, the next leg of this business (if it exists) is a pitch to capital. Its presumably only a finite pitch, presumably the ideal place to present it is the AGM. for convenience if nothing else, the only thing I can see that will alter the timing is the final / BP response. We can (presumably) expect that Management would disclose SP relevant adverse BP feedback, and present the final to SH.

Whatever the story, whatever the pitch, however successful, whatever the agenda, unless these guys are as horrific as HC chat would have us believe (and I don't have sufficient evidence of same, we don't yet know.

Saying for example that this has been trialed broadly with some accolades and moderate or better success, but without scale or depth of resources... I dont see how that message will be universally dismissed.

Again, the real life case study is interesting.