Ann: Update on PrIME LOI Funding , page-4

FX,
Isn't the real question how many of the 10 x 1% allocations at $665,000 have been sold or committed to?
This announcement today may not necessarily be inconsistent with the one earlier this month that explained:

"Following on from the PrIME Biologics funding LOI announced to the market on 3rd June 2013 NuSep has received a number of enquiries from sophisticated investors to participate in the funding of PrIME Biologics. The Board of NuSep has resolved that it will offer up to 10% of its shareholding in 1% shareholding blocks to these external investors. These 1% shareholding blocks will be priced at S$665,000 each, valuing PrIME Biologics at S$66.5m (A$57m). This funding will be in addition and complementary to, the funding from any cornerstone investor. By placing up to 10% of PrIME Biologics now NuSep starts the timeline to the cGMP ilestone
and allows NuSep to bring in the additional funds at a later time and at a higher valuation than the current S$66.5m (A$57m). This will enable NuSep to maintain a higher ownership in PrIME Biologics. By splitting the funding this way NuSep will be able to maintain approximately 70% of PrIME Biologics while funding it through to its first commercial sale. Further, this will enable NuSep to demerge PrIME Biologics to its shareholders at the time of its IPO and at a higher value than the current S$66.5m (A$57m) valuation."

I guess there is a question though about who approached who first. The earlier announcement quoted above suggests that the initiative came from a number of sophisticated investors, whereas the announcement today suggests to me that NuSep made the overtures?

I'm thinking I will stump up my (my SMSF's) $15k but would not be so keen if it was at or above my average which is 6.5 cents. Maybe our newest director is protecting us from greater dilution and as stated there is a real element of reward for long term investors who have endured the massive decline in stock value.

Fingers crossed RB and Syd will be proved correct at long last.
Regards,