mention in afr, page-2

One significant point for me is that
*The article is covering three "biotechs"*
if it was generally a number of biotechs and CST one among them
with just a couple of lines dedicated to - it would not be that important
but in a coverage of only three and CST one of them and in the AFR
this for me constitutes a significant change
yet i cant really tell why i see it as significant.
maybe because our stock hardly ever gets any coverage.

In regards to speculation that ''management may be behind the generation
of this coverage or the way it is covered'' i am more inclined to believe
that the part the management may be behind is some obvious subdued mode
of the article, unless perhaps the reporter handles it as an
'unknown species this one' - 'never heard of before' etc, lol!

Yet not a single buy so far! if it had been PXS coverage it would have had
by now a considerable surge both in volume and in Sp.
I m sure CST management whether they are behind the generation or mode
of this coverage or not must be happy about the total Non response...


By the way, Happy Birthday FG!