some interim comments on the agm

Dear all,

Some interim comments on the AGM. Was pleases to meet you Peter and re-meet some shareholders from previous AGM's (Barry). Peter was scribbling furiously so will have a much better synopsis. These comments pick up on what I was interested in.

Firstly, all Directors seemed in high spirits, which I do believe is an important sign.
• Malcolm McColl will not be starting for a while – finishing off at Starpharma for a short time yet. Until then will continue as they are. Paul Hopper has been doing a lot of work on behalf of VLA and will continue to do so for some time.
• Believe they made a comment about Directors possibly not being able to purchase shares at present. While they did not say any more, it was not a categorical statement, but I imagine if they are in the middle of trials (where they have some info but not enough to make an announcement) they are probably not allowed to purchase. My thoughts though.

Re Increase Directors Fee Pool.
Personally I had no problem with this. Two comments were made:
a. Apparently has not been changed for some years, and they are increasingly having contact with other potential Directors.
b. Also, at present Non-Exec Directors are involved in day-to-day operations and that will quite rightly come at some cost.
If, as we hope, we are at the pointy end of trials etc, can understand they may need extra funds for new Directors. Paul was keen to stress the point was not to give themselves pay rises.

Cap Raising.
* Had thought the current Capital Raising may have been to bring in new cornerstone investor thru M. McColl Top 20 only owning 16% has been a personal concern to me. Anyway, this was not the case. Believe they said it was arranged without much (maybe any) involvement of Malcolm McColl.

As has been stated on HC previously, it had sounded like they had sufficient funds for current purposes. So why raise funds now, when Share price will (hopefully) rise with good news? They did state one possible use is to start other trial(s). Intravenous the main one of course. To be honest, I did not get a sense of exactly why funds would be required. Funnily enough despite this I had no problem with them raising funds. Did mention that trials cost between $80k and $100k per patient. Does not take too many patients to get to $2m. Will be curious to hear Peter’s opinion.


Why Shares at a Discount?
This was my main concern. Brought up the fact a discount drives the price down. Why not issue at current price with free attaching options? Believers will still buy for the value of options. Paul said they would take it on board.
Other comments:
• A number of Pharma’s showing some level of interest in VLA. However, until more info on the trials, they are not going to go any further. Was mentioned that Amgen were not the only suitor for Biovex, so some non-successful bidders may still be on the lookout.

• On slide 21 is a poster prepared by the Mary Crowley Cancer Research Centre. A number of names are circled. Seem to recall mention that many of these (maybe all – care to comment, Peter / Barry / Others who were at the AGM???) now have some sort of dealings with VLA. Irrespective, there are clearly a number of well-credentialed scientists showing some interest in VLA

• One question I raised was about distant tumours. At several previous AGM’s and on numerous presentations they have mentioned that if a cell is broken down and bursts open, the hope is that these drugs will seek out other cancers AND turn the bodies own antibodies against other cancers. Could not understand why we have heard about 3 patients having good results in tumours, but not hear anything about any effects on distant tumours. Darren answered that they are monitoring, but just do not know yet. Apparently these effects sometimes occur later that might be expected. Just have to be patient. Darren was very good in his explanation.

• At some stage someone mentioned (before or after the meeting) that the trial is for all cancer sufferers. Memory is hazy here. Had initially thought he said this included patients with and without ICAM receptors. On reflection though, do not all the cancers cells we are targeting have ICAM receptors?? Possibly they were not discriminating between patients with or without the antibodies. If so, believe the point was that success ratio is better when limited to those without antibodies. Please ignore this unless someone can clarify. It was an important point – should have taken more notice – or just notes. My apologies. Just ignore if no confirmation from others.

• There was a lot of talk on HC re the disappearing tumour. Slide 18 I believe was probably this patient. Lymph nodes – not detected at Day 127. Wow. However, believe they said there was other disease elsewhere. As mentioned above, too soon to comment on the Cavatak effect (if any) on these.

• Slide 19 shows ‘license’ to Big Pharma being an end point. No comment was made, but I was very happy with this. Feared from previous announcements they were considering selling to Big Pharma altogether. Personal bandwagon – hate to see Australian inventions sold overseas for a one-off 10 fold gain rather than ongoing licensing. Hopefully this is what is meant. May have read too much into a single slide though.

• Paul H was very positive about Leonard Post. Seems he has already helped in a number of ways.

• There was one man there raised several questions, and mentioned that he had a relative with inoperable cancer, and this was a good part of the reason he was an investor. Having had a mother who died from cancer (MANY years ago now) it is important that a number of shareholders who really believe that an investment in VLA is not purely for financial reasons.

Please forgive personal bandwagon comments. Look forward to Peter and / or others clarifying and adding other comments. Was done quickly at lunch, so not checked. Do not there take this to be gospel. Just my quickly scribbled down thoughts. While disappointed at shares being issued at a discount again, I can see it is not an easy thing for scientists to manage a company such as VLA so believe we do have to give some leeway.

Have a magnificent weekend.

Rgds
KMS