As the options that directors have "given" themselves seem to...

As the options that directors have "given" themselves seem to have given certain wise posters ammunition to continue with their down-ramping, let me try and put it into perspective.

Remember that the shares that they have "given" themselves is as remuneration. Renumeration with a risk. If they succeed they will be hansomely rewarded, however, if they don't deliver the goods to shareholders they will end up with virtually zero. For us shareholders, what could be better than that?

The "gift" that they have given themselves has a share dilution factor of 10%. What does this really mean for us shareholders?
If they don't succeed, the share allocation will have zero effect on shareholders.

However, for the purpose of the exercise let us say that they succeed and that they bring Cvac to commercialisation. What do you think that the share price would be if they did? I certainly have no idea, but let me put down a few possibilities in front of your eyes.

50 cents per share?
$1 per share?
$1.50 per share?
$3.00 per share?
$10.00 per share?
$15.00 per share?

Is there a single shareholder amongst us that wouldn't be very satisfied with any of the above outcomes. I don't think that any of us would be loosing sleep about the fact that if the directors hadn't given themselves shares as remuneration, that each of the above sp possibilities would be worth 10% more.

I am more than happy with the proposed share allocation, and I am particulaly happy that they decided not to draw-down on the Fortrend facility to pay themselves in cash.