Results of AGM, page-20

Medical treatments that cost 1000’s of dollars a year are that expensive because they cost 10’s or 100’s of millions of dollars to develop.

They have to develop a product, undertake animal testing (typically 2 years), raise more funds to fund the next phase. The next phase is human testing, another two years there but they have to get approval from authorities first to undertake human testing, which is dependent upon the results of their first phases. Then there’s a second round of human testing, another 18-24 months there, then guess what, a third round; two more years. Finally, assuming they haven’t had any set-backs, assuming they’ve had approval from the various authorities at every step, they get approval.

Well over 90% never get a viable product to market.

If they do, they need have to have patents and IP protections in place. They have to seek these in each market they wish to penetrate.

It takes 5-7 years to complete the cycle, assuming they even do complete it and the cost is prohibitive. Quite often the cost of producing the end-product is quite expensive also. This is why some medicines cost so much; companies need to recoup their investment.

If you’re figures are based on $10k per year per user/customer, you may want to reconsider.

The smallest MC of an ASX200 listed company is north of $500M and no doubt there'll be a sizeable reshuffle for the next rebalance in December and this will change. There are companies with an MC of $700m that aren't in the ASX200. Can it happen? Yes it can, would I bet the house on in it? Not likely.