Ann: Preliminary Final Report and Full Year Accounts, page-23

You make some excellent points. Particularly about communication in reporting from management.
I don’t think it’s a cost issue as millions goes into R&D, staff and corporate costs.

Could start with the website. Clean it up and make it atleast look attractive and inviting to potential new investors.
Granted the medical space is slow and laborious in effecting and implementing changes in system platforms and getting the right decision makers to push new forms of treatment such as non-opioid Penthrox in short term acute pain management.

I’ll cross example another biotech company called Paradigm Biopharma. PAR. I’m sure many of you are familiar with it.
Read through a few of their announcements and or back track to get an idea of what they are trying to achieve, and what the progress is to date. It is crystal clear and highlights the difference in progressiveness in the execution and the difference in transparency by management to shareholders, Andrew executing their strategy.

Now I would prefer to back MVP and Penthrox because it is a proven product in Australia, and has the clinical data to back itS indications for use. Where as PAR repurposing PPS, is yet to be approved for clinical use, however if they do get approval in AUS and then the US in a few years, I know which management group will execute the commercial launch, scale, and rollout most effectively. Hands down PAR.

Penthrox is a no brainer IMO. But at this point in time I cannot see any evidence or change in MVP management execution of global rollout to give me confidence to put it into my top 5 long term growth stocks.