AlbedoPART AYour post was a good one - using the funds to be...

Albedo

PART A
Your post was a good one - using the funds to be locked in on 16 July (voting on main part of Luxinvest story), and then being received in bank a week later, is obviously the way forward, albeit with the significant stated dilution - BUT critically we stay in the game at this very sharp end of things. As I understand it, your summary of the way forward from there was good - (a) TOD has said we look forward to increasing operations from mid August (b) This will partly use some of the July cash to manufacture 50 or so test Mauls to generate orders to prove we can penetrate the market (c) orders will generate massive interest from new shareholders, which would be expected to reflect favourably on the shareprice. These items are all Maul focussed - but fair enough as we have discussed forever what a massive police enforcement market IS OUT THERE (not might be out there). Also remember that Taser have a distribution deal with MST, and already have enforcement doors open everywhere globally. The Breon Defence (Taser) boss has recently said they expect to sell truckloads of Mauls. I'm trying to keep this brief, but remember the Company has advised that all the costings are done on manufacture of Mauls, and appropriate business profit margins are there at all relevant levels. This is the case now. OK we are less than a month away from having the resources to get all this underway. Surely no thinking shareholder would seriously propose that we leave this untested, and instead throw the towel in now? Throwing the towel in also means walking away from the MPM-NLWS (military) stuff widely discussed before, and anticipated to come good for MST with a confidence boosting contract soon in October 2012.

PART B
Now the alternative proposed by humpy8000 on 27 June seems (with respect) to be an extraordinary knee-jerk idea, coming as it does only about 2.5 weeks before the meeting that will ensure we are NOT yet throwing the towel in. IMHO it is difficult to see why this 'walk away and sell the IP line' might remotely be helpful for shareholder prospects at this time. This idea would (i) avoid the immediate dilution proposed (yes), but has massive downsides such as (ii) we pass up serious prospects for shareholder returns as per my first paragraph (iii) We don't know what the IP is worth - I would say a lot - BUT it will take years of lawyers and pain to sort it, and there is no guarantee that lowly shareholders would figure much in the leftover spoils.

Frankly, I would regard this idea as plain silly as it lacks any shred of common sense 'at this time', and absolutely works directly against shareholder interests. Accordingly, I reject it as undeserving of serious consideration outside of a pub.