why now, page-6

Hi AJ Sput. The reason I wish to have this discussion is the above quote from one of the updates here it is again

"final product approval is still expected by June/July 2009 provided SBL is able to resolve the storage condition issue to MPS’ satisfaction."


Aj you stated in our last discussion about note 9 in 6 month report

"i just want to add the speculation that we were moving to china was started by Jim placing that note 9 in the half yearly to me there was no other way to interpret it other than if we don't find a partner we will shut it down it was as clear as that."


If that was JH starting the speculation about SBL shutting down if no partner is found and that that was clear cut with no other way to interpret it, then by your own logic what exactly is JH trying to tell us here

"provided SBL is able to resolve the storage condition issue to MPS’ satisfaction."

That's right, final production approval is conditional upon SBL satisfying the MPS over storage conditions. That is pretty clear cut would you not say. But I do not recall anyone on HC discussing the final product approval, which we are all hanging out for, now being conditional upon this new criteria. If that is not changing the goal post half way through the match then I do not know what is.

Done to death I don't think so.

Sput you stated and rightly so the following

"don't see it as a big issue to get around."

"If we can't get around an issue like this at this point in the game then god help us."

"There is still no excuse for letting climate effect the product at such a critical"


If your above statements are right then why state the following in an investor update

"final product approval is still expected by June/July 2009 provided SBL is able to resolve the storage condition issue to MPS’ satisfaction."

In fact why say that at all. If it is such a non-issue how did it find its way into the update? They put that proviso in for a reason and as yet I have heard very little about it. Heard plenty about ideas to overcome the storage issues and how inept MPS and SBL were not to see this problem in the first place but nothing on it being a condition of final approval. That is the point I which to discuss and the possible reasons why it is now a condition when it was not before.