Getting caught up...
Something seems astray when there is a question regarding the value creation or contribution made by the 6-month CEO (Sri) when his replacement (Squires) has overseen the subsequent ~70% share price decline?
The "Sri took the reactor offline..." mantra is an excellent example of a Squires' characterization taking on a life of its own:
- No company runs a production facility to produce inventory of unsaleable products. It's a terrible waste of company resources and ties up working capital.
- Sri knew how the reactor was performing. If it could produce saleable products and generate revenue, who doesn't think it would have been running? Was it down for maintenance? Modifications and upgrades? Lack of demand?
- Squires has been back at the helm for ~30 months overseeing at least 5,000 kilograms of capacity over that period. How many kg's have been produced? What has the utilization rate been, 1%? 5%? Seems like it is still "offline."
And... based on current and historical missed milestones, isn't it more likely than not that QMC came close to running out of cash at the end of 2016 because the BOD trusted Squires that a $1M equipment sale to QMA/China was imminent? Why add more crappy debt if revenue was on its way? Does anyone honestly believe Sri, the BOD, and the Lindberg were just ignoring the cash levels?
