The Institution’s/Cash has spoken, page-45

So yes, regardless of whether their private views align with their actions, they have to act as if they agree without reservation.

That least we shareholders operating in a vacuum. We have to decide for ourselves. And it comes down to a simple decision based on a few fairly easy questions:

• Has the company gone as far as it can possibly go? If you think that the 11.5c is the best you can hope for and you should vote for the takeover.
• If the current offer fails will a better offer come up that you could accept? If you think this then you should vote against the takeover.
• Can the company continue to commercialise ResappDx and develop the Covid19 test and produce a better outcome within a reasonable timeline? If you think it can then you should vote against the takeover.

Unfortunately those questions are not easy to answer with certainty because of the "Promote Transaction" requirement.

From my perspective, and scouring whatever information is available to me, I use the following logic:

1. ResApp has assembled a compelling set of commercial arrangements, pilots, trials and evaluations across an array of products and services.
2. With the announcement of each and every building block the company has promoted the potential and realisable value of the development.
3. The Pfizer offer has arrived very quickly after the Covid19 results were released, and Pfizer have committed to help fund further research on the Covid19 test even if the takeover fails.
4. Therefore Pfizer attach considerable value to the Covid19 test.
5. Therefore we should also attach considerable value to the Covid19 test.
6. If anything had happened recently to damage the future prospects of ResappDx then the company is required to disclose that information. The duty of disclosure overrides any commercial contract such as the proposed takeover.
7. No announcement has been made.
8. Therefore the company's future prospects are just as bright as they appeared a week ago.
9. Therefore better takeover offers and better share prices are both highly likely.

Therefore I will vote no, regardless of what the board "really" thinks.