RH doesn't have to seat a BoD if he has no intent of uplisting P2O (indy BoD is the signal for the *PROs* to actually have to undertake a partially laddered cover on 5 years' aggregate efforts re: PTOI)
that is why in mid 2012 i noted *then* 3 outcomes one of which i removed with RH's investment of 2013
imo flagship not only works .. but has buyer/s so i will totally disagree re: buyout .. but clearly as i articulated in my post >> anyone can put a pricetag in of their choosing
$i used $250M .. others may use $50M or $500M
it's no secret based on my DD that this sector is emerging (ie ascending) and has at a minimum a decade of *growth* within it .. making the successful early adopter (ie best of breed) worth *investing* in from my perspective
lastly i've noted a sequence of material events out of mgmt that can't be misinterpreted by anyone
imo intent of mgmt will be known *shortly* after first prox sale is 8k'd
if there is no indy BoD seated .. imo *buyout* is en route (pubco/private)
if there is an indy BoD seated .. uplisting comes to pass in 2015
either way works for this P2O investor .. my CB is sub 20c re: PTOI and i currently hold 6x more *markers* than i did a mere 2 years ago
i am totally cognizant of my risk reward when it comes to disruptive techs in emerging sectors
and i'm not alone in that thinking .. ACC executive summary from Oct 2014 .. comes to mind .. :)
"keyboards to oil" might make a great *business plan*, because I think many have been worn out by now claiming the same old thing for numerous years......
I see only two possibilities for this, it happens or it doesn't.....
here's to the sequence of material events that mgmt files next that can't be misinterpreted by anyone yet again......