Are you serious? 3 agreements with varmco worth $40 mio and they...

Are you serious? 3 agreements with varmco worth $40 mio and they sue for $0.5 mio plus costs?

I think that this gives us a fairly good indication that the whole deal was not properly arranged with the normal due diligence around ability of the other party to perform on the contract in the first place. It looks more like a plea for sympathy from Varmco, than anything else, to try and salvage something from the contract to save face because the BOD would be more than likely chasing shadows if they pursue a stronger compensation package.
No doubt they have a ratchet clause in their remuneration package which only rewards on "perceived performance" (because that's all they have done to date) such that there will not be any "performance shares" returned due to this botched deal. This was one of the "milestones" achieved from which shares were issued to key management personnel.
BTW I have only seen one apology to the learner from a poster to date. As it has turned out he called the viability of Varmco into question correctly and got absolutely abused for it. (I chose to believe that management knew more than I did even though feeling a little uncomfortable about issues being raised at the time)

On the SP, (apart from any compensating good news re the Canadian connection about to be announced before market opening on Thursday) I doubt whether the price would move much lower than where it is now given that it is not the far ahead of where it was before the varmco announcement and given that there has been a reasonable amount of promise and development over the last year such as GMP, CannEpil etc even though no substantial revenue flow has yet to eventuate.