Try to explain the convoluted logic of your position. Here is a firm that - in the best case scenario for sake of argument - is transitioning from an R&D to full production model.
It is indisputable that such a firm requires tremendous amounts of capital to finance the production. This is true even if the firm's Balance Sheet had positive working capital at the point of moving to production mode. In a case where the B/S is so poor that the firm shows negative working capital, the capital requirements are more urgent.
So lets summarize. R&D firm - ready to produce - some would say it has begun production - the B/S shows negative working capital - the company's most recent filing confirms its need for imminent financing merely to support its going concern cash need, let alone production ramp up.
So I ask you - Why would such a firm want to understate its story? We understand that it may wants to be careful not to overstate its status but, wolf, your scenario represents an extreme case of understating what you assess to be a "catbird seat" competitive position with superior technology, inviolable, fail-safe patent protection, at the point of imminent (measured in weeks if not days)production, poised to pump out product as soon as an OEM gives the thumbs up. Again, why would such a firm, requiring capital, with all of the aforementioned characteristics, understate its position when it needs to sell its story to the capital markets to get the best price for capital funding that it can? |
