Its an interesting one Lux. Your summation is what the average...

Its an interesting one Lux. Your summation is what the average punter likely believes too.

Per Caspex, myself, others (even WB to some extent) the interesting point here is what if anything else is "under the hood" here - and does that explain resilience of SP at this level?

As you say we await final, as I indicated earlier in the year extrapolation of the data produces a compelling proposition. You say it produced ''nothing new'' that means it was consistent right? Consistent with previous outcomes in more varied circumstances... begs the question, what if it were utilised over a longer period, 6 or 12 months? Its not like any alternate is shorter? It still hasn't been trailed stand alone.

Caspex referenced the COVID result constraints earlier

I think there is a clear financial constraint and as WB pointed out a regulatory / timing / financial constraint ... and a small developer in the antipodes will always face challenges on the global stage, a BP derived CEO would likely help if MM does step down... but whilst there's a place for scepticism here, blunt cynicism given results you yourself reference could result in premature / inaccurate speculation imo

Given the known financial uncertainty, unknown final results/ result commentary, BP "interest", benefit of identifying an immediate complimentary use case, substitutes discussion, potential basis for a new generation of medication (potentially with modification) etc - I'm expecting an ''interesting'' AGM...

Quite the soap opera