Plough: It's not compelling economics, is it? I would definitely...

Plough: It's not compelling economics, is it? I would definitely want a clear timeframe of significantly profitable operations, preferably in the near future. Especially considering the dismal history of the company, and the inherent risks involved in any aquaculture operation even without a bad history, it really only makes sense to throw good money after bad with a very significant upside and a strong reason to think it will happen soon. If the expectation even in the absence of another disaster is not that great (breakeven or worse), why is the share price going to go up in the near future, and thus, you would have to ask yourself why would you throw more money in?