PAA Post AGM ,, 2022 Highlights, page-53

Many thanks Para for taking the effort to video that and for putting it up so promptly. As the other attendees has suggested there is nothing like seeing and hearing first hand (even more or less).
Couple of stand outs for me.
1. I have previously banged on about poor comms. Probably the height of my gripes was when the BoD decided to cast off on a moonshot for a covid treatment and went about mixing up the comms that detracted from the dog story. Now it comes out casually at the AGM that the covid story has been put back in its box so full focus ( both human and fiscal resources) can be directed to just dogs and MND ( basically already paid for and provides at least some human tolerance info).
I have no problem with that decision , that RB has acknowledged as a shift in strategy and in fact totally support it for the very reasons given - small company , under resourced under funded. I do however have a real problem that his info has (typically) not been relayed to market. Frankly I know 5 year olds who could spin that news positively. Seriously, with such low level transparency, how does the BoD imagine they can engender trust from the market. Should I shred the time line / progress chart of all projects previously put up in an update ?

2. Roger clearly stated that yes the business will require additional funds and these may come in the form of a CR or "hopefully" from a (dog) deal to run phs 3. Unfortunately this was very much towards the end of the meeting so there was no real opportunity for anyone to follow up on this point. Who of us wants a CR at a discounted to current (7.5 - 8 cent) SP. How does the BoD imagine a deal can be cut with anyone other than Elanco prior to the full expiry of the patents in 2024.

So they are the problems, what of the solutions ? How about a general market update that comes clean, sets out the fact that the dog trials are looking very positive however due to the patent position may still take some time to resolve. That with regards MND the initial indications suggest human tolerance is not at this stage presenting any unexpected negative outcomes. The BoD has reviewed the projects and come to the decision in order to optimise both funds available and human resources required to park the other projects such as covid trials for the time being

Believe it or not I am an advocate (of the science) but at this point in time I dont want to be the one to knock on Bucky's door and try to convince him he should now have faith in whatever news the BoD rolls out ?