Ann: Technology Update, page-23

Ozblue some your concerns are valid but not the whole picture.

Our mining industry gets massive subsidies, the solar industry wouldn't have existed without subsidies, and same goes for any scientific venture so you concerns regarding subsidies are invalid.

Infant technology in its development stage needs massive investment, and part of that equation may be subsidies. Eventually it must prove itself, but that comes at a later stage.

However you are right to be critical of their marketing strategy. I'm am not happy with their lack lustre performance which is evident with their lack of sales.

My opinion is they should not have elected for a cost recovery model. I believe the company should have put its money where its mouth is on this point. They keep drumming the point with volume orders, the price will come down, and generate for demand.

I say price the unit to the value of a volume order, accept the losses but generate demand. Similar to a nuclear reaction, you need a big bang to kick start and even bigger self sustaining bang. I'll need to go back to find the presentation which described this pattern. Does anyone know which one? I can't recall the values, I think it was for each doubling of orders there is a 10% cost reduction.

I personally will support a CR for this kind of strategy. A 50% shortfall with progress in sales is easier to fill than a 100% shortfall and no sales.