Originally posted by Previous
Obviously Risk is still on the table.
That Risk cannot be quantified because we are in an information vacuum.
It's funny. No one criticises or questions any of the RAH, RAH brigade lead by
@patience their Cheerleader.
If I have seen unfounded statements like "10 bagger from here" once I have seen it a hundred times about 4dS. All relatively unchallenged.
Yet, I asked a question and pointed out a few home truths and everyone wants me to justify every last word and possible nuance of my statements.
That's ok though. I have a very thick skin. Best to just ignore me if you disagree. I seldom knowingly make non factual statements (I am waiting for the avalanche of replies). And I will not back down until I am proved wrong. Which no one here has done at this juncture.
That conversation is finished...can we move on now .
I have made my points and will continue to interject to future discussion as I see fit.
But I am done talking about that topic. No more to say, no more to see.
It will all come out in the wash as they say.
Well I'm grateful for your perspective and interpretation of the facts. I find alternative views really useful, especially when they are as thoughtfully argued yours. We all weight facts and nuances differently and so come to a range of conclusions - some being mutually exclusive. I still think the potential returns outweigh the risk and uncertainty, but I want some concrete basis for reassurance when the results of the next iteration are announced. For example, I want to know what the fundamental glitch was with the first batch and how that has been resolved. I don't mind if the timeline moves out, particularly if management is explicit about this. All IMHO - no facts here!
