Ann: Response to ASX Query, page-50

mercer is long gone and good riddance.

it is well known that the company was run poorly under his watch, hence the new board (who in my view remain highly competent) were handed a reclamation project with the two basic choices. completely can the program or try to see if it actually works in a methodical manner.

the first would have been just as (or more) unpopular as the failed trial result has been.

as to those who seem to think the board should have been omnipotent to know that the treatment wouldn't beat placebo need to consider why they are in biotech (sorry for the harsh words but there it is). this is the exact reason why we have placebo controlled trials, because open label trials can be misleading. I do not hold this against the current board and would suggest that no one else should either. all they can do (and definitely would have done) is evaluate the science and previous "trial" data (in inverted commas because of its poor quality). they engaged with world leading experts in wound care in the trial design. they gave it every chance to succeed.

I want a board that can find another opportunity and give that every chance to succeed. I do not want a board consisting of two directors with very checkered backgrounds from a dog mining stock who incidentally don't have biotech or mining backgrounds.

vote no (and I really can't wait for this agm to be over so we can move on)