A few observations.Jeff Sengelman stressed that the Moelis...

A few observations.

Jeff Sengelman stressed that the Moelis report was independent. As such, the Board was unaware of the contents. While there were many positives in the report about the company, its technology and the opportunity before it, some of the forecasts do not reflect the view of the Board. Management's internal targets are "significantly more aspirational and we are confident we will achieve them."

Paul Guilfoyle noted as a positive the fact that Moelis had chosen to do a report on Harvest which reflected their interest in the company and it's potential. The inference being that Moelis are selective about which companies they take an interest in.

A question was asked about sales KPI's for the coming quarter. PG said they can't make public internal sales forecasts, however he noted that "the company KPI's are significantly more than any mentioned in any company reports."

Another question was asked about whether Moelis would provide any updated reports/forecasts.

PG noted that Moelis had applied significant risk parameters to their forecasts. The assumption was that if Harvest hits their own internal sales KPI's then Moelis would upgrade accordingly.

Jeff Sengelman acknowledged that mistakes had been made especially around providing market notification around Lowery's departure, and release of the Moelis report, and that the Board had learned from these mistakes. The mistakes would not be repeated. He also emphasized that they had the best interests of all shareholders at heart, from the smallest to the biggest.

He was extremely confident that Phase 2 of the Strategic Plan would be as successful as Phase 1 has been, and that in 12 months time Harvest will be a completely different company in terms of capitalizing on the opportunity it has before it.