DD, I'm not ignoring them. I've gone through everything from the 2/6/24 PR, any subsequent PR's, Q's and K's looking for something to support your view. We do know that the MAA was submitted using the manual production process. Was Flaskworks included in it? Don't know and any subsequent reference to the company's business plan confirm that it was. Your position is that there were a half dozen CMC's subsequent that provided enough information that the average stockholder was made aware of the delay being due to the production change to Flaskworks. I have to disagree. References from the above listed sources like "key development work for the Flaskworks manufacturing system has been completed", " design work to make the Flaskworks system GMP-compatible was completed", "design work to make the Flaskworks system GMP-compatible was completed", don't make any reference to the MAA being changed from the original manual process, and in fact there still has not been any notification that a completed Flaskworks unit has been completed and tested. You can argue the average stockholder should have been able to read the CMC's and read between the lines. That's where we disagree. Stockholders deserve better than that.
It's Christmas. Hope you have a most merry and blessed holiday. And the same wishes to anyone else reading this post.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
