blue sky promises..., page-18

Hi Furniture, you'll know that I was across in MHM too and appalled at what happened.

FWIW the big difference here is that management are open, transparent and honest - and possibly even more importantly have a solid track record of prior phenomenal success, compare Mark Bouris (self made multi-millionaire of YBR fame) or Geoff Cummings (turned around Roche Oceania from loss making to most profitable part of the company) to Mr Mead or Frank and you'll start to see the difference.

Also consider that MHM was a one trick pony trying to breathe new life into an old facility with someone else's tech and no IP control, whereas ADO are commercialising revolutionary new surface chemistry across the biotech sector and beyond with a solid and expanding scientific and IP portfolio which they created and continue to develop.

I held both ADO and MHM for a period, when I looked at what was required for ADO to win the commercialisation grant it really got me interested, the government doesn't hand these things out without due diligence, I even approached Phil Thick to ask why MHM wasn't looking to access the same funding, they never did, and it's likely that they would never be given it had the business been scrutinised by the same authorities that considered ADO a winner and worthy.