The Chief Technical Officer of any company is the person so designated by the CEO and/or board of directors. There is no requirement that a company have a designated CTO.
It is fortunate that the company had foresight to have the succession of management established ahead of time and ready for announcement at the appropriate time. Therefore it can be concluded that BI also planned ahead of time for succession of technical resources necessary to continue BI's business. It would not make sense to plan one without the other. Sean would not likely accept the designation as CEO if he did not have the technical resources to succeed.
A designation of "Chief Scientist" does not convey knowledge but acknowledges the competence of the individual in the engineering/scientific field but is not a prerequisite to function as a "Chief Scientist". A "qualified person" is anyone who possesses the necessary skills to fulfill the needs of BI as determined by the management of BI. BI is fortunate to be located near the University of Arizona where ample "qualified" persons exist. The employment of such a person does not need to be made public.
Kryron performance speaks for itself. If JBT decides to completely back out of the LOI and the PO, due to current circumstances, then it is JBT's loss. The success of BI is not dependent on any one customer. If Kryron provides the performance JBT was interested in then there are many other LED manufacturing companies around the globe who will take their place. The success or failure of BI is based upon Kryron performance - not on one person or one company.
Knowing what BI knows now, it may be in BI's best interest to respectfully decline a contract with JBT because of what they put in their LOI. An LOI outlines the intent of one party toward another with regard to an agreement, and may only be signed by the party expressing that intent. We don't know if BI accepted the LOI or the PO. Acceptance of the LOI by BI was a requirement but would require an MOU or contract to make it official and binding, i.e. a document signed by both companies. Given the current situation, BI may consider not accepting the PO from JBT based upon the wording of the LOI. The present circumstances of JB's availability were not under control of BI and BI, as a stand alone entity, will do what they have to do to move on.
If BI does not get JBT's business because JB is not available so be it. Life goes on. A LED company that doesn't require so much hand holding might be a better choice.
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
