Re the most recent posts regurgitating matter previously posted...

Re the most recent posts regurgitating matter previously posted numerous times, all these matters have been posted on numerous occasions in the past. Continually posting again and again, without any further information or insight is pointless, as it will not bring about any further satisfactory answers, because we the shareholder's cannot supply all the answers that some apparently need, apart from the obvious, the logical or those already announced, and simply maintains negative market sentiment.

Are you going to continue to do that when new CEO takes over very shortly, because the ex CEO is still a director, or are you going to give this highly regarded new team leader and an already established very good ?Team?, some breathing room to try and get results. And make no doubt about it, it will take him some time to get a handle on things and start to progress things toward bring about the results that we all look forward to in the future. In the process he too, could make a mistake, or make a forecasted announcement that just doesn?t quite pan out for some reason, what then ? And if we keep trashing STI and there is a need to make further capital raisings under the new CEO, what sort of market sentiment do we have then and is the result any better ?. And look out should the new leader come up against an unforeseen problem and experience a long delay, because perhaps we will instantly take the knife to him as well shall we ? So do we just keep trashing it because of history ? or as some of us would believe, if everybody did the opposite, some good might come of it ?

If you have any belief in what is the very real potential for the team for the ?Team? and the ?Products?, it might bode well to concentrate on trying to (within reason, fact and honesty), help improve the situation and help make the future work, because if we remain in the past, it may not happen, and I don?t known about you, but I don?t want negative history repeating itself.

Further, in reply to the recent historical notice complaints, I simply point out that there was sufficient information releases and discussion on this forum to form quite a few logical opinions and explanations as to why things didn?t happen. ie. You cannot on line market a product when authorities won?t let you, you cannot see a product in an Australian Pharmacy until required approvals are obtained, , you cannot count on an income from helicon, if the contract doesn?t go through, (it then obviously trashes the outcome of any previously projected sales figure). Too many ignore the obvious combination of delays and costs associated with gaining regulatory approvals, patents, change in direction i.e. factory, having to proof up every piece of equipment, delays in drug identification numbers et. etc. For it?s size STI has had more going in more directions than many larger companies have in several years, and each and every stage has had it?s problems, changes, delays and hence costs, whilst the negative market sentiment based on one man, not the ?Team? and it?s ?Products?, assisted in trashing the share price, hence making capital raising extremely difficult and confined to minimal amounts, (funnily enough mainly supported by Zodiac Capital), which otherwise may have allowed for earlier production or development efforts on other products ? And there are more products yet to be released as and when the time delays in getting regulatory approval and the cash and opportunity occur to manufacture, distribute and sell occur, so sorry but there?s more delays to come.

Regardless, if your not satisfied with the explanations given, then write to the company and seek an explanation or take it to a shareholders meeting, because it sure as hell won't get sorted out any better here than it was the first numerous times it was posted about here. And by all means if you get a reply or obtain new and relevant information the post it here and let us know, because without new information or an explanation it still generally remains little more than negative speculation, maintaining negative sentiment with no further valid reason for doing so.

Have no problem with new facts, which are then linked to old facts and change the state of play, be it in a positive or negative. I do have a problem with history being flogged to death like clothing beaten on the rocks, like it or not it is useless history and just damages the fabric. We and presumably the company are supposed to learn from history and make it better in the future, and wouldn't it be a good thing if we shareholders encouraged them to do just that ?

And for info it leaves me a little perplexed when I see people virtually screaming fraud because directors in one company are directors in another. That applies to a larger percentage of directors and or CEO's in most companies including some of our largest and most revered. Screams of their lining their own pockets by operating through multiple companies apparently makes them crooked. But a large percentage of directors and/or CEO's are or have done that very thing, and then when in a big enough company also set up very lucrative and extraordinarily generous, executive salaries, executive bonuses and huge executive share distributions, giving them many millions. Yet most times the majority of shareholders still vote for this to happen, often regardless of the actual performance of the company. (I often vote no because it hasn?t been earned, or badly needs reducing to something approximating the effort put in or effect achieved, but usually no?s are always in the minority and it gets approved by a vast majority regardless). Anyway using the same or similar basis for the term crook, I often find it difficult to determine who is the bigger potential crook, and like it or not, (and I don't like it), that's business and you can't do much about. But one things for sure, simply constantly winging about it, will get you no where. And when that CEO or Director does something as has recently occurred, which not only lines his own pocket but that of the shareholders, I can?t help but feel the shareholder has little to complain about.

Also, just because a person possibly has a jaded past, that doesn't mean they don't learn some thing from it, and do a better job next time, nor that the current circumstances are anything remotely like the circumstances of old from which the jaded history come from, which in this case they most certainly are no where near the same. I?m simply talking about giving a person the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise, in any particular case or circumstance, the simple basis of our own lawful rights, which I?m sure most of us would scream about, if they were taken away or we were treated as though they don?t exist. Yet I have seen this sentiment expressed on this forum. And regardless in accepting responsibilities for our actions and our part played in any outcome, should we assist in potentially destroying a company, the team, employee's livelihoods, product failure and even shareholder loss (our money), because of feelings or doubts about one person ? And this ignores the potential for losing money because of it ?

So what is the opposite ? If you have any belief in the "Team" and the "Products" (forget about the CEO), WHAT DO YOU DO ? Suggestion : Try supporting it, wake up and smell the roses, what do you want to happen and how can you help this to occur ? Are you going to be part of the solution or simply remain part of the problem because of perceived history ?

As always do you own research, make you own decisions, accept responsibility for losses as well as profits.