Ann: Increased Scheme Consideration from Pfizer, page-309

Do you mean the independent expert has baked it in? I don't think that's possible because:

1. There's no mention of a data validation dependency in the tiny amount of information passed on in the public announcements.
2. The independent expert can't possibly have known about the data validation test because that was agreed between Pfizer and ResApp after the independent expert supplied the draft report.

I believe the "fair and reasonable" price range offered by the independent expert reflect s the considerable unknowns with a pre-revenue micro-cap med-tech company with no commercial history for its established product, and regulatory/financial risks for its new product.

I suspect the conversation between ResApp and Pfizer after the draft report was received went something like this:
ResApp: IER says not in shareholders' best interests. It has to be between 14.6c and 27.7c to get the independent expert's nod.
Pfizer: Okay, we'll offer 14.6c.
ResApp: Be serious! You think that's going to make the grade when the shareholders see a top end of 27.7c? Go mid-point at least.
Pfizer: How do we know we're not buying a pup? What if this thing doesn't make the grade and we have to tip in half a billion more just to make it work?
ResApp: How about if we can prove it's good as it is? Would you go mid-point then?
Pfizer: Okay, deal. But if it flops we're not going over 14.6c. And by the way we're not satisfied that you're doing enough to promote this takeover. It looks to us like you're doing the minimum you think you can get away with. If we go in with a conditional mid-point offer you're going to have to step up and really start promoting this thing seriously. Don't think we'll hold back if we think you've broken your part of the bargain!