For me what is particularly exciting about POET is its unforeseen potential. POET architecture allows for combinations of computing objects in the future that will meet functions not even dreamed of at present, as you say Andrea, beyond Von Neumann. That’s the reason why I would like to go on owning shares in a company that holds the cutting edge and becomes a world leader. This excites my imagination, but then there’s the greed motive which requires a buy out. Hence my offer of a PET only buy out to this debate, leaving POET intact.

Frankly we are entirely dependant on management to deliver the product to whatever market can benefit from its broad advantages and potential. Its chosen route, as far as I understand, is to engage with partners in the vertical markets it has identified and prioritised. Early success here is what will draw the attention of the big boys and the feeding frenzy, auction, bidding war that we all envisage is POET’s Midas touch. As a relatively new member of the $70+ Club (38 pounds and 4 pence + Club to us Brits), who would not want that sort of return from our investment? That would sort my greed motive out. but I am still left hooked on the horns of a dilemma! I want my cake and eat it.

I can accept your point about POET being just one thing, but I am not convinced that there is not the possibility that management could, if it chose to, divide its PET style markets and its POET style markets. PET is what will replace what is currently out there, it will have a more immediate impact on the IC world and is what should attract the Big Boy interest for a PET specific buy out. The more complex, less well understood benefits and long term value of POET products largely remains work in progress and need funding. Surely the income from a PET buy out would fund such developments and enable the team to make POET fly.

Here DNWL’s point of management motives enters the argument. Is there the leadership to do this? I would imagine that Dr Taylor and his team of PhDs would wish for POET’s continued development and I for one would like a solution that keeps this amazing development team in existence, but a very special management leader would be needed who was sensitive to development and market needs.

Will Monday 28 Apr 2014 provide the answer?