You missed the entire point of my post.I assume at the time...

You missed the entire point of my post.
I assume at the time prior to the vaccine results and prior to the poor initial manufacturing results there were alternatives to the management of shareholder capital that did not involve the eventual 1:1000 consolidation and dilution? ..
We will never know (it seems) if these alternatives were ever considered?
But there is no denying the effect of the eventual outcome on earlier shareholders and you can spin it as many ways as you like, however if there was a 1:1000 share consolidation (as I recall along with another poster here) like I said the maths never lies and that maths would reflect that a current SP of $28.30 really equates to a original (and now actual) SP of 28 cents. $28.30/1000 being 0.283 c
The point I am making is this is rarely reflected on ASX or other providers charts - giving a false impression of the overall performance and return on the initial capital invested in the enterprise.
Look at the chart opposite here on HC (as an example) - can you see this reflected in the chart ?
I can't even see a chart going back to prior to the renaming
This leads to a misrepresentation to what has really happened, what capital has really been required to get to this point and I am only pointing out there is a positive affirmation bias on what is shown here.
Think what you like about me (I don't care) - my motifs and my reasons for any investment or divulgence or otherwise.
Like I said I am really glad things at this point seem to be turning around for those that have managed to hold thru and I hope that is the same for yourself but please don't deceive yourself on the amount of money that has been required to develop this product and who at the end of the day "paid for it"...
Cheers best wishes NA and IMO and DYOR.