oogee, i came to twoguys defence because of the gang mentality. if someone has a problem with someone else why should others come in and rip someone apart? let those two who have a problem try to resolve it between the two of them. when others come in they are just feeding the fire and things will only spread to ugly proportions. i was on the brunt end of this and why i bared my venom. if people had any decency and common sense they would see this. look admittedly i started off on the wrong foot--i always question management regardless of which company i invest in--did it with natcore, with q solar, and while trying to see if i would buy in here. i still don't agree with the approach that management is taking because the fact, and i know we differ on this, is that how can you expect to get the best buyout when there hasn't been any proven revenue stream? what you will get is low ball offers. both you and fairchij have been closed to this--what does a company have to hide in trying to do so? i really don't think you will be spending money like you say--that's just not the case. money is spent in r&d anyways whether you license or you don't as well as promotions which is a huge chunk. i actually agree of the two--companies should focus on the r&d and make it solid so that shareholders know that they have something not just some mickey mouse product where s/p goes up only on sentiment--something in which i differ from what i believe the poster was (soleius) raised at least to that extent, albeit, a company needs to be promoted to get recognized. look, like i said, i have been invested in natcore for a little over three years--i bring up natcore because like i had stated it is very much like opel in that it is steeped in r&d and has yet to get commercial revenue--but again i mention the difference in business model--natcore is taking the licensing approach is backed by massive industry partners one of which wanted to buy it out--but natcore refused because it knows the real value will come when the company shows its leadership in the industry as well as revenue stream. opel has an excellent technology, one which has promise but if it was that promising why is the company looking for a buyout? to me that doesn't make sense, because when you do this you are inevitably opening yourself up to low ball offers especially when there is nothing on the revenue side (as to my understanding). if there were good revenue flows i would guarantee that the buyout offers will be much higher. right now i will be very honest here--i don't even see a buyout of $20--if i should be proven wrong i will be very happy for everyone here, again, look what i have said--it would be a shame if the company's tech is as good as it is being stated to have less than that. but my question will come back to this, how would you get higher offers? i think that everyone who thinks they will get a massive buyout sheerly on the ip is kidding themselves, but then again, i think people must be idiots--those like the dragons, kramer and everyone who would say the same thing i am saying here--an evaluation is one thing but to prove it through some sort of revenue is another--without which again you will tend to get a lower buyout offer--to expect a high one is just not going to happen--and if it does, which for every shareholders' sake i hope it does, and going by way of the current strategy--i will be stunned and definitely as i have stated own up to it and say very impressive well done indeed--but mark my words--a buy out at this stage unless someone is really blown away will be under $20--i can't see it being any other way--i'm sorry for being honest here (but again this is only imho). nevertheless, with all this said and questions swirling about buyout price, the best thing is for investors to go directly to the source--managment and point blank ask them what are we wanting to get? see what they say---at least then you will have a rough idea regardless of how things move--at the end of the day one can only take the best offer and like i said, i am wanting the most for it for all share holders--and as i had stated before i will congratulate everyone here, i just hope to do so where people feel happy with what comes. i told one person privately who has holdings here--if the company doesn't get at least $20 i wouldn't know how to go back to him/her and say congratulations because for such a promising tech it would seem that the buyout was a shame. if anything, i have only been advocating for a well planned, carefully executed buyout approach and while you and fairchij are convinced it is going on, and i would agree that people should not micromanage management and place a certain degree of trust in them (after all why invest in something you don't have either trust and faith in), it isn't unhealthy to question and seek answers so that you can protect what you have already invested--i guess honestly the best thing for anyone to do is take some money off the table at least close to what has been invested and let the rest ride--especially in venture capitals. in any case, and i really mean this--glta i want to see a big buyout value for everyone.