The news of the last week was really buried in the interview, I thought. Not to be critical but there was no mention of Hillary's office (although that may evoke political bias anyway) and no mention by Jim of "Lockheed". I believe it was only the 'interviewer' who mentioned Lockheed by name.
I'd like to see these types of "interviews" be a bit more carefully scripted. No reason they couldn't be. They are really info-mercials. Messages like "valuation" need to be more simply represented. "If we achieve just 1% penetration of the TAM for each of our products, the company will be generating $X top line within 2 years." Investors can apply standard multiples to that to estimate value.
Rgardless, judging from today's activity, we're picking up investors. Can't argue with results. This company is worth well in excess of $10 or even $20 per share.
"Don't confuse activity with results" - Crilly
