Ann: Second Quarter Results Presentation, page-23

You are a shareholder. You either read page 12 and conclude MSB have told you a fact or they have told you their opinion or belief only (and so that is not the same as being told a hard and completely reliable fact) when they write "validated potency assay" no?

If you think they've told you a fact - you may be disappointed if they were only telling you an opinion and the FDA subsequently disagrees with them. Then you might want to sue.

If you think they are telling you an opinion only then you might not buy more shares as you would not feel your investment had been derisked yet on the potency assay aspect, then you might feel they'd not properly informed you and the market.

This question is already important and relevant to each and every shareholder and potential shareholder ddwn - I don't know why you immediately want to offer another thought.

My opinion is - MSB is offering an opinion, a belief only that the potency assay has been validated. I'd want to see proof of the validation like I'd want to see proof of a math problem to believe it was a proof. Or I'd want to see that someone else, someone impartial and independent had looked at the evidence and agreed the proof was sound.

would Mesoblast readily make these statements without some sound justifications, knowing that there’s a fair few ambulance chasers around?

If you as a shareholder never commit yourself to deciding for yourself whether what you are being told is a fact or an opinion MSB may be able to safely say pretty much anything at all and rely on you to give them the benefit of the doubt and unlimited forgiveness if they ever need it.