Ann: Positive AD-214 Phase I extension study results, page-196

Whilst Tim Oldham has never said that $45m is the "price", I think that as it has been repeated on several occasions I am inclined to lean towards 1AD seeking a number in that ballpark, for the following reason.

One of the most prevalent human bias is the "anchoring" bias

"Anchoring bias describes people’s tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information they receive on a topic. Regardless of the accuracy of that information, people use it as a reference point, or anchor, to make subsequent judgments."

https://www.scribbr.com/research-bias/anchoring-bias/

As an intelligent man with a PhD, and an ASX CEO I think Tim Oldham will be well aware of this type of bias, and wouldn't have repeatedly stated that number if there were no basis (or at least that's what they are aiming for), especially given the wide range of numbers in the presentation slide which mentions these other licensing deals, as a deal done at a number materially lower than that would cause shareholders to be upset at the "low" price if a deal for say $10m was done, due to the anchoring that had been created by the mention of the $45m