Why would you say this?
If the shares rose to $5, obviously the millions of financing shares you're referring to would be about 3. The company is on record saying 2013 is the last year of financing, and that it is limited to about 10% of cap ex. So, the shares going to 5 -- aside from the obvious advantages to all -- would cap the cap ex equity contribution at about 3M shares.
At $5/share, personally, I'd prefer that he issue a full blown secondary, selling double that or more.
Not sure why you call the past issuance innocence. What options did he have one or two years ago? Suppose you can argue that he's grown too fast. But then you'd have to give up the bullish operational argument that he's grown so fast.
It wasn't innocence; nor was it simple. Plans were made to grow an exponentially larger company, one with strategic barriers based on first mover advantage. The plan has always been public. So anyone who relentlessly complains about any issuance can mostly blame themselves, because it was always known. Admittedly, the circumstances have dictated more shares be issued than anticipated, and it has been a problem. It may or may no it be in the future (which I have on good RD authority is what investing is all about).
Now that the Sweden connection has been established, and the company has reached most of its 5 year plan goals, a bond offering appears possible. Chances of this without the Sweden connection are about zero at this stage in the company's development. Anyone think a US bank would underwrite a $15M bond?
So, they are pursuing the bond offering, a great thing for shareholders. They are also pursuing the First North listing, another big positive, with or without the bond offering -- better with, obviously.
