Good question... speaking in good faith, I still believe they...

Good question... speaking in good faith, I still believe they are significantly behind where WBT have got to. I know they have a different strategy, in that they are not looking to license a fully operable memory solution, but rather hoping to secure a buyer based on technical progress.

As we are all to painfully aware, the semiconductor sector is conservative, risk averse, and the major players do not necessarily want to be first movers with a commercially unproven product. Therefore the areas, in my opinion, where 4DS fall behind are as follows:

- yet to secure a manufacturing agreement with a commercial fab (IMEC doesn't count as essentially apples to apples with our CEA-Leti partnership)
- have not achieved full technology transfer and tape-out
- have not produced wafers in a full production
- cannot demonstrate yield and performance results across multiple job lots
- have not qualified

Again, I don't actually think they want to go through this process themselves and would rather sell the IP to someone else and leave them to it.

But without this evidentiary process as to the efficacy of their product / solution / IP I'm not sure they will maximise value with that approach.

My thoughts only and most likely to be proven wrong...