Does low SP perhas suit the management?, page-79

I totally agree with it being built by an Australian company as the Australian government are possibly going to provide funds then it should also provide Australian jobs, as GPP quite readily use consultants for everything else (normal practice) then having an Epic Systems consultant over looking the building of the PDU is a reasonable thought.... just my opinion
The applying for the grant is also a reasonable request, but it makes me wonder why they have included the costs of the trials as well, the OHD Bio-stimulant is ground breaking but it is starting to appear that it hasn't been properly thought out thus the "cap in hand" approach to gather funding. Maybe "Trench's" appointment has finally got them on track?
What are we missing?
What do institutional funds / financiers see that we don't considering that GPP have presented this to large investment houses with no responses or interest ....

@ans25 The point I was making re point 2 your post
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/do...3863900/page-75?post_id=29166029#.WhyT67RdJm8
You made the statement as to the reason why the R & D was rejected, but now are saying your assuming it was the reason. As for why they never received the grant, as GPP have not disclosed to the ASX the reasons it was initially rejected twice and why they have abandoned their attempt to have it reviewed again I don't know.
The relevance of me posting after another person on the thread? I mean I could say the exact same thing about anyone posting but as this is a public forum to discuss stocks of listed companies I assume thats what the intent is to actually discuss stocks.
Really if I was a large share holder in a company I would be more concerned with their historical performance and failure "thus far" to have a project come to fruition since listing rather than what or when other posters time their responses to a discussion.
cheers