Article on news.com.au, page-44

Excellent post caketin. Rather get defensive and hurl insults like some, you have overcome objections with mitigants and thought.

I do disagree about the AHZ share price though if it was just ADAPT/Cardiocel. I wasn't suggesting the company (be just) cardiocel BUT cardiocel and adapt. A company that has a core offering with complimentary offerings is great, but when the complimentary offerings burn serious cash one must assess its worth. And with some major players working on HSV globally (keeping in mind that GSK failed and invested $100M) it difficult to see anything but a drag on momentum.

http://sandiegobiotechnology.com/to...ine-flops-but-genocea-a-buy-in-vaccine-space/

Without the phenomenal costs associated with medical (vaccine) research it could be assumed that a previous cap raising may not have occurred. This would result in fewer fully diluted shares on issue etc etc.

A company going "all in" with a product is risky, but these guys also have adapt, which (may) be used for alternative therapies. Now that is BLUE SKY!

And of course Cardiocel comes with risks. I actually think a current risk is being addressed. That being, why would hospitals and surgeons (in say North America) swap from there currently used patches, which they buy from established relationships, to Cardiocel. There's obviously methods to address this but this post is already long enough.

As always, my opinion only.