there has never been any question about the tech. They spend...

there has never been any question about the tech. They spend $400k a year protecting their IP. Now if only they could spend $400k a year on a sales team.

When David joined, he announced we are no longer an R&D company but a 'SALES' driven one and started promoting us as 'revenue stage' but then he's continued to run us as a penny dreadful speculative R&D company, relying on highly dilutive underpriced capital raisings ( getting close to a fully diluted 3bn shares on issue), R&D rebates and one govt grant of $1.4m

The last 12+ months has shown we are still at the R&D stage, when deals are not signed until customers spend 12 or more months testing our product prior to any kind of contract, that's definitely not sales driven.

Anteo X has been proven over and over since 2014. We have enough data to sign contracts with these customers pending expected results.
They sounded like they were on the right track with Trinseo "This MOU is unlike any others that preceeded it as it will form a COMMERCIAL AGREEMENT once all milestones have been met".

We needed a couple of wins over the past 2 years to keep the wolves from the door and I don't mean the clean energy division. Life science was meant to bring in short-term revenue i.e. food industry, veterinary space, areas with lower regulatory hurdles

Whilst we can't rush the giants we're dealing with, as they do move at a glacial pace, if our tech is as good as it is, we should be throwing resources at the companies who are prepared to 'sign a supply contract pending expected results'. They can't rely on hope that the customer will sign 12-24 months down the track once the customer has done their testing. We are a small company and just don't have the resources, people and financial, to keep going on like this.

Even if we get a lot of grants, that money will be burnt quickly unless the business model changes:

"Demo - Contract - Conditions worked on and meet - Supply as agreed."