Driftin:
Clearly we will disagree on most of these because you seem to believe the company was operated efficiently and in shareholder's best interests.
You already pointed out the dilutive financing. Clearly not in the best interest of shareholders and about to happen again unless orders materialize very quickly.
Not bringing on business development expertise earlier. Many here seem to think that "business development" is "sales". It is not. This an area where I do have some expertise having performed the function for Apple's International's Group for over ten years. Business development is generally viewed as a combination of marketing and strategic analysis. It is normally charged with generating new opportnities for the company and in solidifying long-term relationships. In my opinion this function should have been one of the first funded (not less than a year ago) to investigate and develop new opportunities for the company (automotive manufacturing, other defense oriented businesses, etc.) Mark took this role on himself, and did a lousy job in my opinion.
A focus on generating revenue. The Board should have been asking the question (How does this contribute to future revenue generation, each time Mark attended a conference, formed a joint venture, etc. As I said earlier the whole focus of the comapny was more reseach/acadmic paper presentation than making money.
I think purchasing a 3/4 million dollar printer was a big mistake. Yes, the company needed a development machine but leasing time from someone else would have been far less expensive than buying (let alone leasing) their own equipment. The idea that they were going to make money selling one-off prototypes has been a dismal failure and has generated very little revenue.
I think the fact that they have had 20 plus consecutive quarters of losses speaks volumes about the Board. Yes, I know it's a "start-up" but how long is this reasonable? Another five, ten quarters? Who is going to put money into this sort of business.
I think some hiring decisions (like Mark's spouse) at a very hefty salary and a very large stock bonus the first year, when they were short of technical and business development people was questionable and would have raised questions with an independent Board.
So yes, I do feel strongly that Mark lacks business skills and I think the current Board is as bad or worse. Unfortunately they feed off of each other.
AI
