Ann: Appointment of Non-Executive Director, page-45

putting aside all the typical banter, I want to suggest that all bets are off now.

We have a new BoD and the reason we have a new board is that there was discontent with the previous arrangements.

The clear message coming out is that our focus is ALS/MND and getting to market.

The other part of the message has been the building of data that would represent compelling evidence of potential in other neurological diseases.

PharmAust is a neurological domain player.

We know this will take money and there is much discussion on this but without money it’s just a party pie, a snack not a meal! It takes money to make money. How this will eventuate is not going to be resolved on HC and it takes a load of work to get to the point where you can actually execute on the approach. If you think nothing is happening then that would be a mistake.

We know the company has now got 2 of the team in the USA and that is a pretty clear signal. It is the single most important market and has a 24 week (post 210 patients onboard then data processing and presentation time) to market potential compared to anywhere else. EU and AU required 48 weeks (plus processing etc)

What is yet to be laid out is the strategy and timeline under the new BoD.

It is also not up to MT alone as to how things work out. He is one of several opinions that then form the strategy that he has to deliver upon. Previously, he didn’t even have a voice in the strategy setting and got told what to deliver and when (gee, I wonder if that would be grounds for material disagreement)

Everything prior to the new BoD in terms of future actions, timelines, approaches is irrelevant. Any and all decisions are history.

The new BoD is continuing to formulate a forward path and all the while the machine underneath keeps moving forward, pivoting as required.