Ann: Response to ASX Query, page-19

Geez, "who's behind this", "orchestrated stab"...can you guys take off the tin foil hats and take ownership for your investment decisions? Why not be impartial about this whole ordeal so something can be learned from this whole exercise?

It has NEVER been about revenue, even if it was somewhat impressive (at times). Irrespective of other posters here seemingly brainwashing some into thinking that just because millions of dollars of revenue was coming in, it deserved to be multiples higher - yet then shifting goalposts for targets once quarterly milestones fell well, well short. Remember all those times certain people were predicting profits and cash flow positive operations. And no, it is NOT due to the product either, which might be fantastic, but that isn't the ultimate factor at the end of the day. After all, history has shown even 'good' (much better) products fail (e.g. Betamax, HD-DVD, etc).

It has always, always and I'll say once more, ALWAYS been about financial management. The company operated with its expenses too high for far too long, which always put pressure on the income/balance sheets. You can make good levels of revenue but if you're not covering your costs, that means zip! So you say other companies run similar loss making exercise? Well, they don't go out an conduct an embarrassing number of capital raises in quick succession, before realising they need to reshift their entire strategic focus to a smaller scale. Eventually the lights switched on about expenses being too high, but too little too late.

Eventually the lights will switch on here too....if of course, you're prepared to be impartial and unbias.