I fall into that category. I saw a post that rang of bashing, and I saw red. It's one thing to surface questionable material, but it's something completely different to imply that we are being conned or ripped off by the company. When somebody makes allegations like that based on fragments of information, building an entire narrative around it to negatively implicate a company, they put a target on their backs for an emotional and biting response.
That said, I am still conducting my own DD on the number, but regardless of what the answer is, I'm not allowing that to feed into any fears about a theoretical narrative. I want to find out exactly how the total volume of the grant is being paid out... For example, it is entirely possible that they will receive it in pieces instead of one lump sum. I see no reason why IRAP wouldn't have milestone based objectives tied to future grants. ie, they deliver on phase 1, and they receive a second grant, maybe larger, maybe smaller, but tied directly to the next set of milestones.... They deliver on phase 2, and they receive a third grant... and so on and so forth, with the final target totaling $750,000. I don't know if that's how it's actually happening, but it's an alternative to immediately accusing the owners of evil doings. This is my money, darnit, and I am tired of dealing with the con-artists trying to manipulate me out of my money.
The assumption and accusation of that email being a fake was a mistake on my part, and for that I apologize. That said, if any bashing was unintentional, I apologize for the rest of my response. But I will not apologize for my stance on those who would prey on the inexperienced and naive by using manipulative techniques.
GLTA - still waiting for that PR, Randy...
-LD
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
