RE:RE:RE:I had to change my mind!Your argumentation in some discussions is really adventurous. Again and again you compare Ceapro with currently weak biotech stocks or biotech indices, although CZO absolutely does not belong to this category, because only the future will show that.
Then you pick the 10-year comparison on CZO, probably the only one that is positive. If someone then uses the 5-year comparison as a basis, for example, you ignore that.
Now you also come up with the adventurous idea with the argument, " issuing shares to the market to give the same money back to the market in the form of a dividend doesn't add any value to CZO". Yes of course not!!! Are you representing the opinion of the board or that of a shareholder here? I guess I wrongly assumed that this is a message board for shareholders, instead you are playing the press officer of Ceapro here.
Let me present you with the following numbers:
From 2017-2021, Ceapro increased revenue by 4.3 million from 12.9 million to 17.2 million.
From 2017-2021, Ceapro increased shareholder-equity by 4.7 mill from 22.5 mill to 27.2 mill.
From 2017-2021, Ceapro spent a total of 12.3 mill. on research & development. From 2017-2021, Ceapro's share price lost from over $1.00 to now under $0.50.
And you actually dare to talk about "It also dilutes shareholder value". It's very nice that Ceapro has increased sales, increased shareholder equity and put over 12 mill into the pipeline. The shareholder, however, has fallen by the wayside during this time!!! In 2021 Ceapro invested 3.8 Mill. in R&D and reported 2.8 Mill. profit. But you are actually afraid of Ceapro paying 750,000 dividend?
The whole range you list in your last paragraph about the pipeline and prospects can be read in a slightly modified way in the 2017-2021 annual reports as well. This does not change anything about the catastrophic result for the shareholders and it does not help us if even worse shares are used for comparison.
Incidentally, I am very curious to see how the votes will turn out this year at the Annual General Meeting. If voting is similar to last year, it won't be enough for all the proposals, that's for sure. It is good if Gilles always has the good of Ceapro in mind, but if the shareholder value approach is not taken into account at all, he cannot expect any trust from the shareholders.