Theoretical question for holders, page-22

My view is basically 2/3 with a twist.

I'd go for a decent upfront (Euro 2-5m - this is not a drug discovery) and offer the first 1 or 2 applications at a modest royalty (1-3%) but if it genuinely does multi then royalties step up to 3-10%. Some sort of variation of that - might be a lower royalty for the first 2 years while sales ramp up.

This was called a risk sharing agreement where we took on the risk of failure in order to get a decent return ie we backed ourselves.

I only asked cause most holders have been very patient and I was wondering if desperation was creeping in for a quick sell out - it doesn't come across that way so far - seems more like everyone knew the strategy and agrees with it.

We don't know what the Feb meeting is going to achieve - probably just another hurdle to jump over but you never know - from the ADO side of the story the device doesn't work nearly as effectively without M&G but those dutch can smoke some weird stuff . . .

So far the evidence supports ADO's point of view as the device has been delayed for quite a few years now. I assume we will find out something in March/April - in this case silence from the company could be the best news possible . . . they will go dark on info if negotiations are underway.