Ann: Investor Update & FAQ Webinar, page-117

"..... They went on to do a 20:1 consolidation and the value halved ..........."

Howdy Hittman, believe both you and Slick can both be right however would contend both positions as stated may be just a tad over-simplifed. Slick is primarily a trader so of course his natural bias is to see a consolidation as that would bring on change and in the trading world change generally brings on opportunity. You on the other hand appear to have experienced 1st hand the down side of a consolidation so have the opposite bias. I too hold a stock IMM that chose to consolidate and ever since the SP has pretty much traded in a narrow band so guess I could point to the consolidation as the culprit. suggest however that is simply too narrow an argument. Tend to agree with slick that 8 billion is a tad too many shares to have on market especially where there is still the likelihood / distinct possibility of further dilution via CR's to come however question the virtue of consolidating in isolation. MC stays exactly the same in all respects. Yes you may get rid of the pip traders etc but do you actually become more attractive to bigger players unless there is an additional driving incentive such as meaningful positive progress towards some aspect of commercialization. No specific data but willing to bet the examples Slick alludes to would each have been as part of or timed to co-inside with other strategic moves as part of cleaning up the story. Personally very much look forward to IMU announcing a consolidation as willing to bet other upsides will be very much and publicly in play.

As to the presentation last week. Generally pleasing to see however had to conclude it was basically borne of appeasement towards the retail investor. Good to see PH take the lead. Not totally convinced LC was overly enthusiastic about the event while BG put in a solid performance. Obviously no new news though several points of potential confusion by the punters was addressed and cleaned up. Overall thought it was an honest attempt to answer as many questions as possible. To be extremely critical, while PH demonstrated management is understanding of the SP situation one could argue the opportunity to drive home the message the BoD thanks the punters for sticking around and is doing everything possible to get products through the tunnel and into the market within the shortest possible time frame. PH mentioned a couple of times that management are holders of the stock so share the desire to see higher prices. Frankly, personal position is that it is a bit sad they feel the need to make this sort of pitch. Much better that they find a way to get out in front of all this negativity. AS LC pointed out the lagging SP is in no way connected to the science or the frequency of announcements made. Forget who (apologies) but someone here on HC did point out the potential for more upbeat and simple examples of promoting truthful positive spin. would not keep all the punters happy but perhaps help. Look at the development of the science and perhaps it can be legitimately argued IMU is on its journey via the valley of death - that section of the journey bereft of meaningful positive news. added to that the market generally is all over the place and on a daily basis so anything other than astounding hard news tends to be quickly discounted. Once upon a time (not that long ago) news that 4 out of seven (desperately ill) people on a (phs I) trial had a positive outcome would have sent a real and meaningful rerate. Today and not just for IMU it likely gets discounted with a very short period. Bottom line as LC said - IMU has still not had to announce a failed trial,- the science is more than just solid, management is well aware of the SP and are working diligently to creating a block buster product/s.

Personally have no legitimate reason other than perhaps frustration to change my sentiment.