Thanks for your views...which seem to bear only a passing link...

Thanks for your views...which seem to bear only a passing link to the comments to which you have 'replied'. While I'm sure there is a point that fully escapes me, that you are seeking to make, let me address what appears to be the base premise to your post.  I don't see Ohm revenue as declining. In fact I see declining Ohm revenue as an impossibility unless churn exceeds new installs or if contracts were being cancelled and renegotiated at lower prices. Neither which have been reported. Or even hinted at? I see it as being a relatively flat December quarter for new Ohm sales and installs. Earlier posts have quantified how that conclusion was derived. The rationale provided by the company for that slowdown has been dissected on these threads and there is a high degree of frustration and disbelief towards some of those stated reasons.  I share them.  But there are others which are entirely plausible: one being that the lack of control is proving a barrier to adoption beyond the first few adopters (estimated by me to be around 180), or at least a barrier to adoption without a massive decline in average revenues per unit.

While I accept that the lack of control would place significant downward pressure on pricing, I have taken the assumption that a flat-ish revenue quarter combined with zero commentary on average blended pricing being materially declining (after repeated earlier guidance that it remains around USD750 per unit/system per month), as being that the company will prioritise enhancing the product to protect pricing rather than sacrifice pricing and get sales at any price.  An implied strategy that I support as long as the path is relatively rapid.

I have maintained a position in this company that is reflective of my risk/reward outlook....for the company and for its place in my portfolio. I suggest that you park your interpretation of others investment strategy and rationale, and focus on your own.

All IMO.  GLTA.