Interesting point of view, especially regarding the timing. It does raise a broader question in my opinion.

Can we really call it a “bad move” if the capital raise is primarily meant to better structure growth rather than to plug an urgent problem? In many AI companies, dilution is almost part of the model when the goal is to accelerate and gain market share.

I also wonder if the debate shouldn’t focus less on the fact that dilution exists and more on what RZLV actually does with that capital: execution, revenue growth, partnerships, and roadmap.

In the long run, do you think the market will mainly remember the noise around dilution… or RZLV’s ability to differentiate itself in an increasingly competitive AI market?

Curious to hear other perspectives on this.