1. a fully functioning SFP with sales (at IPO not even fully...

1. a fully functioning SFP with sales (at IPO not even fully built).

IPO, you and other IPO holders referred to the huge potential of the SFP repetitively. Couching the statements in $billion valuations. (Yourself being the only one of those left, due, ostensibly to your holding of escrowed shares until July. Noone can make any realistic claims of a COMERCIALLY VIABLE SFP, it is currently an abject failure even after it was delivered late. Hence LESS THAN the promise of IPO.

2. a completed MFP prototype using the LFP technology. Working, printing. (at IPO it was an idea).

A "completed Prototype". According to statements, but not evidenced anywhere other than in statements. Commerciable viability no more than a guess, currently which it was back around start 2017. It was promised back in March 2017, and stil hasn't been delivered, so LESS THAN IPO.

3. A BINDING agreement with Worley Parsons (at IPO nothing).

$ value of this areement? Nil, currently. $ commitment by WOR, outlined in announcements, Nil. So value, Nil.

4. A collaboration with the CSIRO (at IPO nothing).

30 percent of CSIRO's revenue is from private research. How much input does $100k get you? Why did they find the need to approach CSIIRO, problems they can't solve? Questions here, it's not in any way a game changer.

5. An agreement with DNVGL to certify printed parts (at IPO nothing).

So DNVGL have agreed to "CERTIFY" the parts have they? LOL, that's a lie Melua. They have agreed to TEST them. That's what they do for revenue. They'll get their pound of flesh.

6. Currently around $7M in cash with possibly another $3M to come via SPP (at IPO a mere $2.8M less IPO costs).

Achieved by dilution, not by revenue, so obviously LESS THAN IPO.

Your analyses and research would be helpful to all if it weren't so extremely partisan and were more balanced.