The background of Dr Taylor's statements is highly relevant, IMHO:
The actual milestone (currently as posted on the Opel website) is Q4 i.e. end of December.
All of the intense focus on the end of September, AFAICS, is entirely based on statements Dr Taylor made at the AGM (as reported by Ogee and Fairchij ...). If there is some more reliable and particularly NOT second hand source I'd really like to know what it is.
IMHO it would be very wise to interpret those statements in the light of the following situational factors:
1) Opel was in the fourth financing arrangement in a period of 8 months (with progressively lower amounts tried for $10 million, then dropped to $5 million, 2nd try got $850,000 of it, was apparently unable to meet the "ratio" requirements so changed again and went for only about $3 million additional. Not good. Then tried a PP and the 1st tranche only got 17% filled. 2nd tranche 23 June only 23%. 3rd tranche only 12% still only 52% filled, the last tranche only 1/2 of the previous one. it would take four more trances the size of the last to fill it. AND THAT'S WHERE IT STOOD AT THE TIME OF THOSE STATEMENTS AT THE AGM. Deep trouble filling the PP. The money from the PP was required to pay the solar loan which as a condition of the solar sale. If the PP didn't fill Opel was in VERY deep trouble.
The solar sale conditional agreement was good only til the end of September. Many potential investors may have been wanting to wait til then to see the solar deal become final. And they would have thought it safe (from being caught out of a price spike from a milestone) to wait before buying because the milestone had just been moved all the way to Q4 which did not even begin til the end of Spetember.before buying and Opel was very well aware of that.
So the company would have been under VERY intense pressure to somehow make investors feel that their was a very real possibility of the milestone coming BEFORE the end of September.
That's not saying that there is no possibility that it could, nor that their statements were necessarily skewed. But they obviously were under very intense pressure and motivation and we all know how companies and their employees usually act in such situations.
IMHO, it is therefore wise to take the talk of the guideline being met before September with appropriate skepticism! And also consider who you are getting the secondhand information from and what their past levels of objectivity (or lack thereof) have been. When you are considering secondhand information the credibility of the source is highly relevant.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
