Member Info for FriedmanSowell

For clarity , he absolutely said that the tabletop sugar replacement was going to be us with the commercial partnerships to follow.

Veritas,

I thought he said the tabletop product was going to be launched by Opti first as a way to open the market up by increasing awareness of the product.

As for the pricing, there’s a (vast) middle ground between sugar and premium sweeteners. My point is that we don’t have to ability for a media blitzkrieg, we don’t have the ability to force supermarkets to create space for us and we probably don’t have the skill to create a viral phenomenon. What we do have, is a much lower production cost and the ability to compete on price.

If he meant what he said in that the aim of the table top product was to get to market fast and in doing so encourage commercial partners to start adopting Sweet, then our focus should be on creating as wide a customer base as possible NOT on squeezing each customer now. It’s short-term thinking. The real money is to be made down the line in commercial adoption and global markets. Selling now at a a competitive price is the correct decision.

Lastly, SOH is an intelligent and skilled man but he is weak in this area so I do not trust his thinking or instincts. I don’t think they are coherent for reasons stated above.

“ His decision to move towards marketing sweetbiotix himself, whilst a quicker route to market once regulatory hurdles have been cleared, is also a concern; how will he fund it to raise sufficient awareness outside the shareholder community?”

Especially seeing as he has the opportunity to sell it at a price competitive to sugar, and yet seems determined to price it at a premium so it competes with established sugar replacements.

One way he could gain traction is by selling it at a really competitive price, we are rightly told with pride that, unlike other sugar replacements, our cost of manufacturing is close to that of sugar, way cheaper than sweeteners, and yet we seem determined to give up this competitive advantage in order to chase the fast buck at the expense of wider adoption and the great, organic publicity that would come from that.

This response was on May 7th

I would like this developed by now to say we don't need approval because rather than we may not need it because.

"Hi,

This is a complex area but one we and our partners are familiar with having taken LPLDl through full GRAS (the US equivalence to novel foods) and SlimBiome through self affirmed GRAS. The majority of our partners dont believe we will need novel food status as the deconstructs are FOS and glycosides which are well tolerated. The uniqueness is the process which creates a cleaner, sweeter product as a fibre without aftertastes and valorises commodities like sugar. If you think about it logically you will always need to taste test products during development before any regulatory process so you know that the product is commercially viable. There is a strict process for this so we have to do extensive testing (microbiological, heavy metals etc) and structural analysis and this is what takes the time. We will be announcing the plans for the taste testing shortly."

LIR,

Can you remember what the slide said about Regulatory Approval because from my memory it was a step in the process which conflicts somewhat with what he said about not needing it.

I'm also not sure that it isn't required and I would like him by now to say definitively whether it is or isn't. I first raised this question months ago following points made by Aquae here.

Unfortunately my hearing is poor and having seen the camera and his microphone I assumed I'd be able to fill gaps in my hearing with the video that isn't coming out.

Fair point. I thought I’d taken a picture of the slide but I haven’t got one. It was q1 for our product, the idea being we could use that to raise awareness nd get prospective partners to shift their a*se a bit

I don’t see why you couldn’t ask for clarity Lords. You’re a shareholder

Regarding regulatory approval.

On one of the slides he had a rough timeline that talked of a launch of the tabletop bulk product in Q1 2027 and expanded on that verbally by stating he thought it would be early. When talking of possible commercial deals in Sweet he absolutely did not want to offer timelines for obvious reasons given he’s been terrible at it in the past and has got a load of stick. To the right of the slide was a note about regulatory approval and I’m pretty sure he said we were in that process although I would like that confirmed by an attendee. He didn’t say when it had commenced though.

Unless he was outright lying, which is possible although I hope unlikely, it would seem we are in some stage of gaining approval for the product from regulators

From the Q&A. Not sure what the mike and camera were for.

Thanks to all the team for the presentation and opportunity to taste Sweet yesterday. I want to repeat what was uniformly said yesterday that the taste is excellent.

I noticed SOH was miked up and think it was a camera toy left. Is there a plan to release the full presentation including the Q&As?

Also, the fibre content of a teaspoon of Sweet is fantastic and really on trend. Could we have a full nutritional chart?

Thank you.

See less

Share

LSE:OPTI Logo

OptiBiotix Health

LSE:OPTI

10:31AM 25/06/2026

Hi Mark, Thanks for your feedback. There is always a risk when you ask an audience to test a product and we were really pleased by the overwhelming feedback that we have a product which has an excellent taste with no aftertaste of off tastes. We did this because whilst customers like science to support use they buy on taste and this feedback was consistent with all the feedback we have received from professional testing panels. We were also pleased that everyone said they would buy the product and use it in their tea/coffee etc. We didnt record the session but I will be doing a webinar, probably next week, for those who couldn't attend. We now believe we have a great sugar substitute and when this hits the market it has every chance of being a a huge success. In terms of nutritionals, its very simple, its virtually all fibre. The product has no calories but when the fibres are broken down in the colon it creates beneficial short chain fatty acids (SCFA's) which will have a few calories - hence we say low calorie and not no calories. This s an exiting time for OptiBiotix and its shareholders with an industry changing sweet health prebiotic fibre. Thanks you for your support and please share your feedback on SweetBiotix and the excitement all investors are showing with others.

"Did SOH suggest whether he’d price high or low initially or was he more canvassing shareholders"

Hello Lords. He wants to go high to reflect the value it offers consumers nutritionallly and recognise it's a premium product. He also said that if you go low you can't raise the price. Good points but commercially mistaken in my view given the reasons stated earlier.

Regarding him saying it's not a sugar replacement Iay have misheard and certainly others didn't hear that. I thought there was mixed messaging where it was said but I could sworn he also said it wasn't a sugar replacement in response to the baking question. We need the video for clarity

Thanks everyone, I look forward to the video and really hope they post it up on the website in full.

It wasn't massively well attended but to be fair it was the hottest day of the year and all the authorities were scaremongering to avoid travel and central London so it's fair enough. I did have the feeling at one point of being present at a potentially really significant moment for nutrition and public health. I also think it was interesting when he spoke rightly of the current bug trend towards fibre which we can really hit hard.

The oft-spoken relationship with Coca Cola is us taking advantage of a programme they have where they work with lots of developers to assist them developing products that they might use. Someone asked a good question about whether it meant Coke would then own some of our IP for the help but they don't.

My concerns at this point are threefold. Firstly SOH's commercial nous could make us miss the opportunity. Secondly, why hasn't one of our many huge partners looked at the Opti valuation and thought that they can currently pick up our entire technology platform for less than £2 million pounds which is peanuts. And thirdly, the absolute lack of any recognition the cost-cutting, increased sales and now Sweet development is having on the SP, can the market really be this wrong!!

Thanks LIR.

I think I heard 70p per kg but am deaf as a post so look forward to the video being posted. He was miked up and there was a camera so hopefully we see that soon on the company website. Either way, the point is it is produced at a cost that competes with sugar, which is phenomenal. Trivia on the other hand costs between £1.50-£3.00 to produce per kilo. It would have been good to have had a chart of nutritional information on the screen so we could do a full comparison with different home sweet additives but going on what we did get, our product is outstanding. The fibre content along with the taste makes it extremely desirable.

It terms of how we pitch it, I agreed that we should pitch it to the mass consumer for a number of reasons. Firstly, it will be used in the same quantity as sugar. 1tsp = 1tsp, trivia on the other hand is 1/3 tsp = 1tsp. To price comparably with Trubia then we are actually 3X more expensive to use. If we retail at just above sugar we do 3 really important things, we are priced competitively with sugar and blow sweeteners out of the water, this affects customer behaviour in terms of new customer acquisition and retention. Secondly, SOH talked about using this product to get the message out, grow a customer base and get commercial partners to move a bit quicker, that is more likely to happen with a cheaper price that leads to quicker take up and more adoption (and is where the money is really at), and thirdly, this is just the UK for the initial launch. If it's a success here (more likely to be at a lower price), there's nothing to stop it being rolled out elsewhere at a higher price should we wish.

Regarding its utility in baking, SOH definitely raised doubts about that but Dr Sofia was further away when she spoke so I may have missed her correcting him. And weirdly in that answer, SOH definitely said it IS NOT a sugar replacement which I found worrying and this is the thing that concerns me most. SOH is undoubtedly talented in spotting the science and either developing it or acquiring it, but his marketing nous is not so good. His statement about it not being a sugar replacement really showed how he lacked the clarity essential to selling a product. I am willing to stand corrected though if the video shows I misheard.

It tastes good.

Had just a small amount of the loose sugar replacement stirred into water.

I was VERY happy with the taste and would love to use it. SOH time is early next year on the shelves. As with all SOH timescales we'll file that under wait and see.

Some questions over how it can be used. Good question about whether it can be used in baking and SOH thought not and wanted to hammer home that it wasn't a sugar replacement but a separate product. I think this is problematic. If it can't be marketed as a sugar replacement, will it be bought?

Disagreement in the room about how it's marketed. Someone suggested we learn from the porridge debacle at H&B and make sure that loose Sweet is marketed at a lower price point which attracts more customers. SOH and A.N.Other wanted it to be priced as a premium product which reflects its value.y feeling is that pricing it too high will limit its reach and repeat custom which in turn limits growth whereas out main approach now should be increasing awareness and price is a way to do that.

Lastly for now. I think Dr Sofia said it contains 5g of fibre for every spoon of sugar which is excellent.

If there's a heavy seller it's probably Yorkshire Seed fund. They should have been out years ago anyway. Them selling yo would be a good thing for the stick IMO as they are committed sellers. Their problem is probably the dearth of buyers. There's simply not enough people who have any trust left in SOH's ability to turn this round and now that the family silver is nearly all gone except for the unsellable PBX, the incentives to buy have become lower still.

Steen's job is to maximise shareholder value. I'd say he's absolutely terrible at that job. In fact, I'd say he has made it his business to suppress shareholder value in order to enable his friend to buy up a large chunk on the cheap.

I'm fact, he is second only to SOH when it comes to destroying shareholder value as it was his decision to spin off PBX and agree to terms that meant shareholders couldn't effectively hold the management to account. An absolutely absurd scenario that we saw play out last year.

PBX listed on AIM doubles in value overnight....and makes it harder to sell on the cheap to the CEOs mates.

I’ve had a problem with Lemmings since they wasted their interviews with SOH at Opti so many times and rarely ever challenged him or held his feet to the fire. To do so once with Opti was one thing. To repeat it with Skin is another. Makes it seem like the ego-massage of proximity to a CEO is of more value than the purported aim of getting information to PIs.

When you couple that with the histrionics when anyone even mildly disagrees. It compounds the lack of trust.

Ultimately, Lemmings was just a poster on ADVFN who built a little business out of writing longer form articles of forum posts. I don’t knock him for that btw, can be useful for investors to find information correlated together without having to sort through a whole forum, but that’s about it. I’ve found much more helpful stuff on LSE forums from individuals who post quality research for free.

"and divest the SBTX and PBX stockholdings"

Did he say this in an RNS or have you inferred it?

I am going to have a look but I hadn't seen this.

It seems that you constantly say you don't believe this is going anywhere bit down to zero, that you would feel at any price, and yet never take the opportunity to sell. It's very odd.

I remain invested in a stock that I have nearly lost all hope with, but I don't sell because at this point there is no point and I still see some redeeming features in it. You on the other hand state you will sell and then....you don't.

I'm curious because you offered me investment advice last week, what is your thinking on this?

Net, you said you'd be extremely happy to be out at 10 p last week but that anything would do.

Have you sold yet?

If so, why are you still here.

I’ve registered.

Looking forward to a few hours up town, seeing the presentation and tasting the product, and of course hopefully meeting a few fellow investors.

On a side note, it doesn’t appear to be restricted to current shareholders.