Your statement totally disregards years of ASIC data on market...

Your statement totally disregards years of ASIC data on market manipulation, there is no way the undervaluation is 'natural'. For instance just on the one single day after the share buyback was announced there were 190K fake shares sold into the market to prevent the price from exploding upwards. The share price on that day still went up 3% but without the fake liquidity the price would be much higher. All shorting has been designed to create a false market with CUV, it is not like retail who buy and then wait, shorters Sell fake shares and then manipulate with tricks like circular trading. If the CUV share price was without shorting/manipulation and somewhere in the $35 - $45+ range then the narrative would be different. Having said that CUV has issues with Corp. Governance, and Sir Andrew was a big loss, but in my opinion that type of multi-billion dollar undervaluation compared to DISC is not explained by that or other management weakness, it is largely due to fake liquidity and market manipulation. Remember management has obtained FDA, EMA, TGA approvals, and created a very profitable and hugely cashed up business, which only very few biotechs can say they have achieved.

All IMO DYOR