Ken,I think you have captured the essential points of...

Ken,
I think you have captured the essential points of shortcomings.
In addition,
1. In my time as a shareholder I do not recall LMG management setting an expectation for a milestone delivery date and having actually met it. That tells me that there is a lack of judement among lts leadership of what is realistically acheiveable. This manifests as reputational damage which the Board must have oversight. I now see some critical public comments(eg LinkedIn) re this poor performance area. I can't understand why among a Board of 7 Directors this matter has not been raised to be rectified. It implies to me, that the Board has been asleep at the wheel, so to speak.
2. The introduction of ambiguity into LMG reporting is disasterous for its reputation. As an example, the "production is March" to "production after March" without clarity ofr explanation. It's like going from the finite to infinite. I would have expected the Board to be asking question on this issue(even if it's out of session). If management is unsure of a target date then it can announce an expected date with qualifiers eg ...subject to .......
3.Management appears to do a good job of reporting of what has been achieved, however reporting delays often have little clarity eg what are the underlying drivers of cost overruns - and we seem to have so many cost overruns. Was it poorly budgeted/underfunded?? , unforseen expenses???, Was there too much uncertatinty in revenue?? Why is the tax office holding back the $12.6M rebate?? - Is it because of a backlog??, is it because of inadequate information, is it in dispute re size of claim??

All these point to management and particularly Board performance, AND, I have said it before a number of times and I'll say it again, we need to see the Board moving to remuneration with performance based pay. That will give incentive for realistic expactations to the market, achieveing critical milestones on-time and improved budget/funding management.