Saying the company is "de-risked" based on the tech alone is increasingly awkward.  Our market cap and financial situation, based objectively on what we know (not assume, deduce, infer, take for granted or fantasize) feels more precarious than it has in years.

If volume and instututional ownership was increasing, I'd be less perplexed by the Friday night ATM drop and subsequent information vaccuum.  However, that is clearly not the case and this is starting to just feel plain foolish.

Is dismissing cold objectivity and just assuming there must be a plan contemptuous?  It would be the easiest thing ever for the company to allay such concerns - why don't they?  Can anyone really answer that question without assumptions?  Institutional investors can't but I'm sure someone on Agoracom can!