KCC, funny you mention Mr. Mark Lutkowitz, the same industry "expert" who claimed POET wouldn't make it due to their use of polymer technology.  LOL.  clearly he hadn't read the memo on who uses polymer technology. So much for industry experts!

Back to Mr Patel. Enough has been stated already that questions Mr. Patel's bonafides re photonics and his statements regarding the economics of POET's solutions.  I suspect his conversations with the poster here are not necessarily based on deep analysis of the company's technology and cost effectiveness but based on what he thinks about the company in general.  It's very possible his comments are off the cuff impressions and not based on meaningful technological and business analysis.  As pointed out by ITTR, how does one do a cost comparison when costs for for POET's solutions are simply not available.

It would be reasonable to suggest that people such as Mr.Patel should be asking critical questions in order to make informed opinion and analysis.  Did Mr. Patel engage the company and see first hand the operations and technology.  Did he contact Silterra and ask them how much they are charging POET for wafer production? Did he contact SPX and ask them how much it costs them to fabricate an optical engine?  Did he ask ADVA or Luxeshare how much they are paying for POET's products, and how POET's technology contributes to the overall cost of their products?  Who are these competitors that can do it better and cheaper?  What is their pricing compared to POET?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Suffice it to say, I'm a tad skeptical that he's done the DD before making the blanket statements Mr Mmright claims.  Of course, if Mr.Patel has done all this and more, it would very useful information and a great interest to all investors.