In response to many above questions and at least this might be...

In response to many above questions and at least this might be relevant to most the people who have posted in this thread.

- Nobody expected anything less than a mid-term hold as it is possibly the only clear and consistent message that the intention was always going to be national development focused

- Most seem to have understood that in the six months since December some form of an update would have been a bare minimum to alleviate the "are we there yet feeling"

- Everybody that has bought in since December (including me at 4.1 pre or 1.05 post ) is probably in Red or has resorted to either selling at a stop loss or purchasing to average down you cost.

- We just want something formal that says moving forward we will run a business that will be healthy enough to pay our directors fees and future acquisitions + a bit more for those patient investors considering we've now splashed out for two significant cash positive existing companies

-If as Laura also announce in February that LON had just appointed General Manager for Sales, how have we not hand any reasonable announcement on new supply contracts or firm business development etc

What i personally think is needed is a clear investor presented strategy (GRB do this very well) that would clear up exactly what the **** our money is funding and what the business timelines are for these ambiguous objectives that keep getting re-announced every time a director gets some spotlight