Penny stocks, page-9

I think you will have to define "penny stock".

There are a lot of companies listed on the ASX that are in precarious positions - Low cash levels, low activity levels, no or limited products or levels of research - and no meaningful research roadmap ahead.

These companies come and go - and even linger over time doing nothing.

IMU is (and should never be) put in the same category. It's breadth and depth of research programmes alone place it outside of the definition of a penny stock.

To this we can add past data - which continues to come and accumulate. The value of its existing IP and a very healthy asset base - not to mention the $160mil cash reserves.

IMU can securely fund two years or more of its projected research pathways - no penny stock could do that.

Finally, no penny stock could have managed being admitted to the ASX200. Yes, IMU is no longer there - but that is not because its fundamentals - or its potential - has diminished. Tom Richardson has conveniently (I suspect on purpose knowing his dislike of IMU) the clear signs that entry into the ASX did involve a planned sell down of IMU in the market.

Tom's comments were discussed a few months ago - they are still irrelevant today. Just an attempt to belittle IMU and nothing more.