Ann: Quarterly Activities Report and Appendix 4C - December 2018, page-67

Leaving aside the fact Peak is not the broker, as I'm sure that was a typo, you're right there are concerns as far as those management ideas seemingly not amounting to anything.My cynicism tells me Pac won't push their clients into something they might expect to need cash via a raise and give them a chance to do so later on at lower levels. I'd hate if my broker pushed me into something only for a raise to follow a month later. I don't like or support or want this obviously but that's what I see happening.

And yep, a $20 system *by single site* won't cut it. But back to the original question i asked....which is what makes an ad hoc $50-100k order (with all its added and ignored future costs overlooked) any more palatable than the government rentals adding up to even more in the long run when they could (not assured, but more likely) scale out across a larger network than say, a single site overseas who won't need to do repeat business for years if ever once they have what they want. I get the possible cash flow lag (although even cameras come in delayed per receipts in 4C) but beyond that?

And the patience wearing thin would suggest selling en masse when reality is, no one is interested in buying. And I really don't see a paid-for, spec stock report in our sector, in our cash position as you mention, changing that....nor an ad hoc overseas deal for the similar amount we secured. Of course, land a $500k client and it's a different story but no one at all had targeted that, current or proposed