Member Info for SL100

ValJu- thanks for your post. I recognise all the work Fred and others have done.

I was unaware of all these emails you’re talking about.

But Fred can’t Fight the Whole World here.

He has to choose to ignore and focus on what matters.

I wish him the best in his endeavours but I’m getting the impression that he is trying to fight the war on to many fronts!

Apologies for some errors in spelling and language in previous post- wonders of Predictive Text!

Hi Fred,

You’ve agree to lead this venture and your work to date has to be commended. However straying off on continuous rants against the BOD will achieve nothing. It is also against the recommendations made in the Share Action Group advisory document that somebody posted a link to some days ago. Something about continuous insults and potentially libellous comments?

Key points are:

1. We would like to see clearer evidence of BOD personal financial comment via increased shareholding. In addition to personal involvement it gives greater credibility to the market.

2. Our concerns about continual placing sand the upcoming consolidation. This dilutes our holdings. Such placing have not been appropriately supported by underlying corporate actions and explanations under than ‘used for working capital purposes. We need a clear plan from BOD about developing their products.

3. Greater transparency all round in terms of shareholder holdings, register etc. It all seems too opaque for ordinary pi’s. We need some clarification.

Maybe others can express and refine the key issues better than I can. But continually rubbishing the BOD and engaging in ****ging matches will achieve little and damaged our interests long term.

Hi Fred,

With respect I can’t help but feeling that you are going a bit over the top here. I worry when I read your rambling posts criticizing the company and the actions of the BOD. You are starting to repeat yourself and I believe have lost an understanding of what are the key issues.

Notwithstanding that I am concerned about your overall leadership in this venture. Your posts are starting to speak volumes. You may say what? They make me uncomfortable.

Just speculation-, what possible sp if good news on VAL201?

Interesting.

Anybody feel that an update on 201 will arrive next week.

I find the tone of the email confident and overall dismissive of our concerns and the potential impact of a rejection of the proposals to consolidate.

It’s just an inkling but I don’t see the BOD as particularly perturbed by our proposed actions.

Is something else brewing in Corporate Val- space?

HtoH- no problem with that. I’m only telling my story- each to their own.

Agree Roses.

Many degrees it should read.

Roses- I have any degrees but not Medicine or specific branches of same- Oncology etc.

It’s a mine field......

No I’m not.

Point taken roses-,but seriously do AIM investors go to that level of detail?

BB- you’re right and Ihave. Sold down 50%

Roses:

1. It’s targeting Prostrate Cancer - a key killer of men my age and I’m sure others on this BB. If they succeed it’s a blockbuster drug - both medically band commercially
2. It’s not a one truck pony- it has a few other irons in the fire.

PAD004 and BB.

Let’s be rational. The history of this company has its positives and negatives.

From a research point of view they ‘may have made significant progress in developing important compounds to target specific cancer issues. Are they great? Do we know! Yes it’s a risk.

They need money to do the research- where are they going to get it? Would you invest? Easier to buy a house and rent out? Yield?

Look let’s stop dreaming- this could be mega or nothing?

That’s the reality. With all due respect to all on this Bb- that’s the choice

STAY or GO!

ValJu- firstly I wish to acknowledge your good work to date on behalf of all of us and on a personal level thank you for your communications. It’s much appreciated and reflects on your commitment.

As to what we can achieve- depends on how far we want to go. We are outsiders- so we don’t know the value or otherwise of the technology. Is it good? Is it rubbish?

We are unfortunately between a rock and another similar hard object. VAL I believe know that they may have something. They are academics and therefore ego arrogance kicks in.

We have kicked a bit of ass- and it’s a start- but ultimately I believe we need to let them get in with it.

Fred has done a remarkable And difficult job and is to be commended.

But legally he or others can’t be insiders- notice comments several times in email.

Overall I see this as a bit of a kicking and well done.

It’s made them take notice.

Hi- While I have supported communication with the Valirx BOD- I didn’t agree with any form of ultimatum or demands from them. It was never going to work and it smacks of naivety.

Agree with Fred and others if you have the voting clout that’s another matter.

But if we win - what ? If we win do we lose?

Reality is - investing in these companies is a gamble- pure and simple.

If you’d put your money in BOIL, EUA....

It’s even worse than we believed- time to take out what we have left!

Fred- nobody is victimising or blaming you. You took on this time voluntarily.

Personally- while it has been useful to make contact- the end result has been largely inconclusive and a bit of a damp squib

The vote may change that- maybe- but as I said earlier investing in these companies is a gamble - just like this technology- a gamble they it will work! Most fail... let’s hope they don’t.

God post- reminds me of that quote attributed to an American author whose name escapes me at this time.

Q. What’s the definition of a mine?

A. A hole in the ground with a liar standing on top!