the facts of the matter

Sheik, Thanks for having the good grace to acknowledge that the question of supposed insider trading already had been laid to rest by the company.

As for your concern over other pharmaceutical companies being willing to engage with the current directors, let’s just wait and see. I would imagine that now that Novo Nordisk no longer has a hold on CBio, other pharmas which are interested in the science may come forward – whereas before they would not have wanted to waste management time on a company which seemed to be locked in to a deal with NN. Obviously, once the CBio Board has been strengthened with some new appointments, that would be a plus.

Just to clarify: Shareholders did not kick the whole Board out, as you have claimed. The shareholder group originally sought to remove just 3 directors out of a Board of 9. The way I saw it was that when circumstances changed (after the threat to resign by all the existing directors and the stacking of the Board), the removal of two others was sought (as well as Monsour’s two temporary ring-ins). The fact is the other four previous CBio directors chose to resign of their own accord.

However, now we have a clean slate, that probably is a blessing in disguise as it makes it easier for a new Board to execute a turnaround.

By the way, if you think the tone and quality of communication by the new Board is no better than the previous regime, you must not have attended the 2010 AGM or the EGM in July 2011 both of which were chaired by Jones. His unprofessional behavior at both meetings was a marked contrast to the conduct of our new Chairman Ralph Craven at the 2011 AGM.

Also, judging by some of your comments, you are confusing the CBio Board with the Shareholder Action Group/Substantial Shareholder Group. The website www.cbiogm.com states that Warren Brown was a member of this group, but resigned as soon as he was elected to the Board on 4 November. I understand that Dr Ralph Craven and Helen Cameron were simply the group’s nominees to become directors and were never members of the group. So if you have any issues with statements made by the shareholder group during the campaign, surely you should take it up with the major shareholders behind it rather than bagging the Board.

Finally, I do not recall that the statement “XToll could be worth 10 times what it is now” was ever made by the Substantial Shareholder Group, the Shareholder Action Group or any of the three new directors – despite an allegation by Jones to that effect.

Regardless, I would like to think that the CBio share price could be worth at least 10 times its current price in a year or two.

We all want the same thing here, which is successful development of XToll and a much higher share price, so let's get behind the company.