Absolutely trials are expensive I agree with that which is a...

Absolutely trials are expensive I agree with that which is a reason I like the idea of our FDA submission for Sofpironium Bromide I would hope we can generate strong interest and commercial partnerships if/when this is approved which would help us pay for the additional trials.

I don't use Inncanex as an example because I have held them for the last 4 years, I genuinely think they are the benchmark not only in Australia but globally as far as early-stage biotech startups go. The fact that Robert Clark signed on as a director recently from NovoNordisk a 300 billion dollar company is testimony to what I think the world sees Inncanex can be. What frustrates me is that Inncanex handles its salaries, bonuses and share entitlements so much better than BOT does. For years we've heard all about the 'potential' and 'experience' of these directors we have but we continually pay ridiculous salaries for directors of a company that's only worth $68 million. IHL is worth 6 x BOT but the only director making anywhere near the BOT directors is the CEO, they also incentivise directors with share entitlements that are worth far more than what the price is right now and make them actually prove their results to reap the rewards. Biotech I find is an industry quite unique to the rest of the market where knowing who your directors are and their motivations goes a long way to choosing a good long-term investment again I feel as if the BOT directors don't have a whole lot of skin in the game compared to our competitors.

Guess we will find out Monday what this capital raise will be for, just continually frustrating this company and I lay a lot of blame on the people at the top of the tree. Plenty of faith and I understand dilution is part of the biotech game when bringing drugs to market but usually this dilution happens over longer periods than this and we dilute at much smaller levels.

Goodluck holders.