legal action tobagocrack, page-42

Flick15

Good luck to you and your health.

I'm glad you don't crudely divide people into up-rampers and down-rampers. I am worried if I think people are being sucked in, not by fraud (I have never thought that about SLA) but by untested faith. Of course I could shut up, but I won't until my doubts have been set to rest. Enough said to explain my motives.

In fact I made a hefty profit when I sold.

My problem is that I have worries about the company, which I have already posted on this forum. These relate to not being able to actually find, in the standard databases of medical literature, published papers relating to SLA products and their staff - either Vagif Soultanov's more than 60 papers or, and more generally, papers about the products in the standard databases of medical literature (I did find one of these, with Vagif as the second author); concern over lack of patents; concern over lack of independent directors, with incredulity about the assertion that Peter Stedwell is an independent director (he does not accord with the ASX definitions).

Various reasons have been produced to denigrate my worries, but they are all special pleading. They don't overcome the fact that SLA is out of kilter with simple good practise for biotechs on ASX?

There is too much that looks unusual to me - too many independent warning signals from my investor's metal detectors. Of course I may be wrong, but I won't be reinvesting unless things look right.

Having said that, I don't support what appear to be lies posted here.

If I had your interests at heart I would suggest that the passionate holder of SLA may not be the ones that have your true interests at heart.

Anyway, enough of preaching. And I won't be ending my emails with the converse of Epitiman's signature line:

NO WAY WITH SLA

BIO SHRINKER 2007