Ann: Ceasing to be a substantial holder, page-18

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt till the August results, if they don't provide further light on them then I'd assume this to be the case. Institutional investors don't like companies that release what are deemed to be unnecessary updates as it can seem pumpy and a bit desperate (especially from companies with high risk of needing to raise capital - not applicable to Clinuvel obviously). Could simply be prudent investor relations, but there's absolutely no reason for them not to at least provide confirmation that they are on track and provide a specific timeline in the August results. It only takes looking at the share price for them to know they haven't been providing as much info as is needed for the market to value this properly. There's no competitive advantage associated with revealing specific timelines and confirming progress, every company does it whilst they're engaged in clinical trials.

Same for the cosmetic focused M lines... give us a product name and a release date at least if providing the specifics on how it actually works is too competitively sensitive. They need to confirm in clear terms that they have a product within the M lines prepared for launch in the near term, that's not at all commercially sensitive information but it's valuable info for shareholders.