I note that you often post on the IMU threads and tout RAC in...

I note that you often post on the IMU threads and tout RAC in comparison .....astounding as the CEO of RAC how much you critique IMU much less post on HC during what many would consider CEO business hours of an ASX listed company day in day out ... the RAC shareholders must be over the moon at how much time you spend on other biotech forums (not)


IMHO IMU have progressed on more fronts with the FDA than RAC have so I am not sure why all the chest beating continues on the IMU threads from you given you're at the helm of a company that has also seen it's MC decline circa 69% over the last few years ? IMU will either be successful in their endeavors to treat cancer or not .. simples .... As for your above post comment:


Certainly not helpful for any company developing a product regulated by the CBER


It wouldn't be the first time you've been wrong in your 'assumptions' in relation to the FDA and CBER and ended up with egg on your face though would it ?


For example; you claimed the FDA / CBER wouldn't consider an AA for Mesoblast's CHF indication without them first undertaking another trial (Post #: 72840055 ) and yet MSB have a Pre BLA meeting scheduled for same this quarter and anticipate lodging the BLA by the end of the year for an AA ... not to mention your claims that they also wouldn't receive an FDA approval for GVHD (again) without undertaking another trial ? That opinion you voiced repeatedly worked out well given their FDA approval in Dec last year... lol


I am sure there are other examples on HC where you have been wrong about other biotechs given you 'appear' to be somewhat opinionated on many of them but these ones were obvious to me .... enjoy your day