1AI super thread, page-31

It was an excellent update with Brad and David giving me a really good understanding of where the programs sit to the extent they were able to within what has been publicly disclosed.

With regard to NTCELL it is not dead in the water however what was apparent is that it would have been dead in the water if the strategy that the previous board was promoting had have been adhered to. In particular my interpretation (not their direct words) was that the timelines that were promoted by Tuch were unrealistic at best. A lot of effort seems to have been put into ways of still extracting value from the NTCELL program but of course at this stage they were not able to expand too much on that and that the market will be made aware of the revised strategy in due course. Incidentally the idea behind using deep brain stimulation and NTCELL was proposed by Carolyn Sue.

What was obvious was the directors are clearly excited about the prospects and potential that the partnership with the UNSW and CSIRO could yield. It was clear that some of the best people in the AI space in Australia are working on this program. My read was that they also seemed very confident in the drug combinations that have been disclosed to market to date and it seems apparent to me that this group has some really solid experience in drug development in particular drug combinations.

I also asked if they were aware of comments made by @Heliport on this forum which they confirmed that they were. Whilst they wouldn’t go into specifics they knew who the shareholder is and have tried on multiple occasions to speak with them over the phone, zoom and also even in person with all invitations to do so being outright rejected. My only conclusion from this is that you have to wonder why?

All in all I’m feeling more confident of where this company is headed and who is driving it than before my call.