Absolutely, managing the cash "burn rate" is critical to any start-up's survival. I think we need to be careful about our conclusions, though. I've done a lot of due diligence on the competition and they are/were all pursuing "multiple revenues for revenue." As I've said before, they are/were not just pursuing displays. Displays get visibility because they are sexy consumer products and get PR dollars. (Also, a QD scientist recently told me that displays are not as demanding on the stability of the QD's.) Lot's of applications work is being done behind the scenes, less visibly, that just isn't succeeding commercially yet.
I think this news says to me that an industry wide issue, might be that the real timetable for QD demand is longer than anyone wants. Sure, QMC has lower overhead than the others, and burns cash more slowly, but at the end of the day, if revenues aren't available (to anyone), it's a problem for all. Sort of like the opposite of "a rising tide lifts all ships."
It will be interesting to see how quickly our revenues actually do develop and grow. It still might be a lot slower process than we hope for and a lot further out into the future. And... also might be an additional component to the "Why" reactor #1 versus #2.
