RE: My opinion (for what it's worth)...karead, just one example of flawed reasoning relates to your burn rate comments. Your comments assume that the burn rate will persist at same level. Will it? How do you know? Or are you just reflectively or unreflectively operating on an assumption which may or may not be correct. And if the burn rate is high, has the money been well spent? What has that money been spent on anyway? Do the expenditures outweigh the potential dilution that would flow from another round of financing?
What about the technology and intellectual know-how which SMY has (increasingly recognized by "disinterested" third parties with expertise)? Does that matter? Does it matter given that the whole sector has suddenly been moved into forward gear? In particular does the term gatekeeper technology mean anything to you and to SMY's status in the market? What aspect of SMY's constellation of technology may qualify as gatekeeper tech?
You scratched the surface. Dig deeper. Once you get caught up then perhaps there will be room for discussion. Your comment on the difficulty of getting intelligent discussion going is presumptuous and reflects either folly or hubris. It just ain't true. Yes there is some pathetic and purile discussion on this thread, which doesn't distinguish it from others. But on the whole the discussion is very good.
I think that SMY's business destiny will tell us everything we need to know. Given the activity in the sector, who knows, we may get a sense of that before you actually brief yourself on what you need to know to be able to credibly participate. Be less brief in briefing yourself. And once you do that and are less selective in your evaluative observations, you may actually get corresponding commentary.