If a contract he already has, was going to be significant to revenues (earnings?) going forward, especially near term.......or if it (the contract, or that application) was going to be significant to selling the whole company or selling a vertical.......then it seems like for the sake of shareholders (whether value for a vertical/company sale reflected in current PPS, or the ultimate sale price) the CEO should get out as much of that information as possible (while meeting NDAs, etc.). I am not talking like some of the things they have played up in the past, that really had no solid foundation. (Although as I discussed then, it seems like a CEO's duty to play up things, before new rounds of fund raising, defends those words....and they didn't go farther than they legally could. And it was up to investors to suss out the risks in Mgt's "expectations" that weren't based on actual guidance.) If this HL2/IVAS thing has a solid foundation, I would think Mgt would be highlighting it, not downplaying it.
Yes, it is in the customer's hands. But if mvis Mgt has some idea that the customer will make a business out of it, Mgt should convey some value in it for mvis. If mvis Mgt doesn't have any idea, and thus isn't highlighting it, then it is a leap of faith for an investor to assign some significant value to something that Mgt won't even play up. (Especially given the history of Mgt, albeit different CEOs, to err on the side of overly playing up things. But even disregarding that company reputation, the lack of promotion doesn't support a leap of faith.)
If a poster is invested in another stock/company, with a competing tech, why would that make posting a negative-mvis viewpoint on this mvis board, something that could help him with the other stock investment ? First off, it certainly won't affect which tech/product is bought by customers. And, no investor is going to see comments here, and run out and buy another stock (driving the PPS up ?), and sell MVIS (driving the PPS down ?). Maybe, someone here would be encouraged to do some DD on the other stock, and decide it is a good investment......but I don't think that would ever amount to anything that would effect the PPS of the other stock OR mvis.
It doesn't matter what motives the poster has. (Maybe we disagree on whether there are significant volumes of board members acting just on anonymous poster's suggestions.) He can have a motive (if he does) to fool people, but be cannot control that, it is the reader who controls that. IMO, attempts to fool (especially lame stuff....and we don't generally see sophisticated attempts to fool) are a waste of the poster's time. So, essentially, if someone posts some skeptical or anti-mvis comments, they are simply providing a chance for everybody to consider whether the point made is valid or not. And on a board (when it was more populated, and has a positive-mvis group think) that leans pro-mvis, it is a benefit to have skeptical views (regardless of the motivation behind those views being posted). Of course these days, IF one reads everything, including by hillerby and white, there isn't really a pro-mvis group think, certainly not in volume of posts/words (and that is even if you ignore the abusive nonsense). But IMO it is good to have other skeptical/negative-mvis viewpoints expressed here.
All JMHO, as always.