Hi DS, Agree totally with all your points, however I also...

Hi DS,

Agree totally with all your points, however I also understand from chatting with Richard, reading their presentations and from the investor roadshow that what you say here... "tumor cell death as is implied then it is pretty massive (as a layman I think I am more frustrated that this significance is not clear in the announcements) and all that is needed to smash it out of the park is demonstrate the same without direct injection. Hence if that is now the animal models being undertaken" ... is exactly what is going on. This in part has caused me some frustration as the market doesn't seem to appreciate the opportunity. Hence frustrations around lack of marketing / education.

To summarise my understanding of things:

* Animals models (via direct injection) achieved fantastic results. i.e. 600% + improvement over any other alternatives. We know this.
* They moved into blood borne delivery (read change of strategy we're all going on about) and are currently doing animals models, through the same people(?) to show proof of concept and efficacy. To-date my understanding is that these are progressing well, although I have no direct knowledge of that, it's more my reading of language and the positive attitude, although they can hardly be anythign but.
* These results are targeted to come out around the middle of this year. This could be a real kicker, but not so much if no one understands or knows about it...circle back to PR here.
* In the meantime they're heads-down-bum-up into the science - but unfortunately at the expense of PR. I think their take on this is they only have so many resources and they prefer to let the science shine through. Fair enough in many respects, but I agree with you in that they are missing an opportunity here and shareholders are the losers in the short to medium term.

Unfortunately apart from the science there's not a lot going on in the interim. If they solely rely on their science to do the talking we're in for a period of little to no news, which will no doubt weigh on the sp although recent uptick in trading is interesting. Is their someone with more knowledge than us punters looking at this? (Not hard as many punters find the science a bit hard to really understand properly). It may be that something like the MYC challenge could come out of left field but I rate that as a lower than we might hope as PYC is a small operation in WA and not in the 'mainstream' where this is more likely to land. This is where partnerships they talk about are interesting and, I think their strategy is sound. i.e. they team up with other 'bigger fish' and they have a shot. This is strongly boosted by the fantastic results they have achieved in the science, but may be too early stage to count this time?

The other thing is UQ but that seems like a very slow road and far from the 'rapid path to 'commercialisation' than was initially put out.

So the potential of the science continues to be mind boggling, but it is a slow road with all the steps required. In the meantime without PR we only have the science to support the share price, which as just mentioned is a slow road.