Hey Surges - I won't blow smoke up your proverbial but once...

Hey Surges - I won't blow smoke up your proverbial but once again another outstanding post! Sometimes my over-active imagination conjures up that you may in fact be OBJ's Mr Hammond and if you're not, OBJ could do well to have someone on board that has an acute understanding of this sector as yourself.

In relation to the issue of cap raising, I agree with all of the points you raised but it is comprehendable that some on this forum would be a little perplexed by this isuue. In the AGM Presentation 30/11/2010 on the second page OBJ states:

'There are a number of stages that any licensing arrangement must pass through that would enable a
targeted partnering company to adopt the OBJ technology as a preferred drug delivery alternative. This
includes undergoing its own internal testing program, its own product marketing development program,
a technical and manufacturing development process and final manufacture and distribution. This
process can often be measured in years and the timelines are very much controlled by the partnering
company. In order that this process can be better streamlined, OBJ has taken the decision to undertake
some of the preliminary testing (in vitro and in vivo) internally and provide the results to the targeted
companies with which OBJ intends partnering.
Essentially, OBJ will itself conduct some of this initial work that would otherwise be done by our
partners and will engage external testing facilities to progress the testing program.'

After the previous varied criptic ASX releases in relation to 3M, it was finally deducted that OBJ was in fact paying 3M initially. Would you interpret now that if OBJ undertake the above that they will be funding this 'preliminary testing (in vitro and in vivo) internally and provide the results to the targeted
companies with which OBJ intends partnering' themselves with reimbursement upon successful outcomes? Or will it be funded by the partnering companies or a combination of both?

It is cryptic issues like the one raised here that plant the seed of doubt as to where the funds will originate. And as you are well aware, this 'preliminary testing (in vitro and in vivo)' can be quite expensive - especially pharmaceutical in vivo.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.