MBLY
Mobileye Global Inc. Class A Common Stock
stock NASDAQ

MBLY and INTC

MBLY and INTC

MBLY

IMO it's even odds at this point that this is smh\_tmi so it's not totally clear that you need to use the past tense here.
All due respect, smh/late is pretty clearly grimma to your theodan.
It seems to me that you are susceptible and exploitable based on a root of (healthy) skeptisim. It's been clear in those interactions, as well as the period during which MBLY was going to end run everyone with the lidar that they were "developing."
It's fair to say that the board needs more substantive content with so many of us staying away or just memeing while we watch, and understandable that when an MBA Lidar Engineer shows up to say things that only an ex LAZR sales person with a decent command of chatgpt could say, that if fills that void. Even better if it tickles the skeptism and calls it "head not in the sand."
We don't know where Microvision stands right now, and we haven't known really this entire time. Glen does and the board do. We do know that MVIS is in a bad spot. I don't think there are all that many heads in the sand on either of these points really, and I don't think that unsubstantiated "i told you so trust me bros" from a failed lazr investor on points that none of us actually know about count for much. I don't think folks posting about future potential are necessarily heads in the sand just because they're hopeful and looking for what could be. Taking on a critical bent has nothing to do with not having your head in the sand. It's just a yoga voice.
If anything the certaintly with which the trust me bros are stated belies the reality of our real knowlege of current workings, both biz and technical, where the only connection is "no big contract must = mavin bad". The idea that such a confident voice about the main unknowns is exclusively informed and not attempting to stir sentiment is at least as head in the sand as saying that Glen is going to sign a contract or that Microvision's MEMs are really impressive. Note that these things premised on "no contract" are being stated in an environment where there are no big contracts at all anywhere, at least not that are sustainable to the suplier. The only contracts that we have seen are those in which the supplier "loss leads" in hopes of growth. Not even the best lidar is going to compete against free lidar.
That's it. I appreciate many of your write ups and am obviously out of line with this characterization. But I doubt that I'm wrong.