I guess the 3 years timeframe for the credit line, Steipp's employment contract, and a forecasted timeframe for stock appreciation ( based on real financial performance, etc.) relative to a possibility of dilution could be compared to see what could line up when, etc.
It seems like a wild card is when/how the credit line is used. If it's just used to fund operations ( pay salaries, etc.; implied from Chung's CC comments) vs grow shareholder value through new partnerships, new channels to market, etc., then it doesn't sound very promising.
Ask yourself if the CEO is totally open with CFO on strategic plans, etc. Giving the CEO the benefit of doubt as knowing more than all, he may not be, or Chung might have been tasked to just find a way to keep things going for the next three years independent of other potential ( or no) other developments.
I still believe that more effort should go into convincing general shareholders that LQMT is an investment worth their time. it may not be.
But as for LQMT having crappy day, etc. ( Jollymon's question/comment), I don,t think they have them if the are guaranteed salaries, etc. for next few years).
If things are still slow to develop, maybe Steipp would be motivated to dumb his shares on a pump or what have you.
If Steipp cares about his reputation with AAPL and MTRN, my guess is that he has convinced the latter that things will work out to their timeline ( vs. necessarily general shareholders).
