the latest iteration of my model is starting with 800 patients...

the latest iteration of my model is starting with 800 patients in Q1 of '24 and growing by 100 people per qtr up to 5,100 at the end of Q4 '34. That 5,100 represents 85% of the lower end of potential number of people with Retts in the USA of 6,000 and 56% of the upper end of the potential number of people of 9,000. Why would you choose a much smaller figure of 35%? and what base for the 35% would you choose to use - the number of known people of 4,500 or the lower or upper end of the potential number?

And there's plenty of blue sky for a potential takeover company irrespective of these numbers for Daybue anyway. They can work out for themselves the potential of 2591 to treat many more neuro-development disorders, and potentially even some neuro-degenerative conditions, than only the 4 we're currently testing for. That could add an order of magnitude to any takeover offer which current shareholders should be willing to accept. Whether any big pharm is willing to make such an offer is another matter, but if not, then NEU should stay in Australian hands as far as I'm concerned.