Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[Protector]

Couche, except for the fact that PPHM in the last brochure invites shareholders and provides a complete brochure which probably will hold much more information then any letter they could write, it may be good to keep in mind we will have a Quaterly/CC shortly.

Although I agree that a letter would be nice, I also said such PPHM letter would very probably not share any information that we are seeking because it could harm PPHM. So besides the courtesy or whatever other sign it would carry this letter would be no more then grounds for renewed criticism as to the silence PPHM currently keeps (as it did in Aug/Sep 2012 where we had the same complaints) and without any doubt the fact that some will say that the letter brings us nothing new but CEO Kings word. Kings word will be attack immediately thereafter based on some of his 'intent' expressions that have not yet materialized and hence be dragged into the usual comment on such topic.

I'd prefer better questions at the CC (although they have improved with our most recent analyst that seems not to stay on soft grounds and over amicable attitude). And I wouldn't mind if CEO King, at next Quarterly/CC, possibly includes some equivalent of such shareholders letter somewhere in the event.

Everybody is of course free to vote the way they want but voting is quite final. It is not like writing a critical post of which the consequences are none.

We have SEEN how the SHELF of PPHM shares SAVE THE COMPANY. And it is not because they have the shares on the shelve that they will issue them the day after. PPHM has NO immediate cash problems and as some explained could hold 1 to 2 years now that the Avid revenue increases (and the gross profit will likely increase too with Avid II technology). Not next Q/CC but the one after will cover the first quarter in which Avid II will have been in production for at least 50% of the quarter. In the next one we will see what a full quarter of Avid II production brings.

So if PPHM prepares a shelf it will be to sponsor big, high leverage, projects such as our new PII/PIII were I don't thing the FDA will ask near 600 patients. Furthermore PPHM know where the centres are, negotiated agreements, etc and hence a SECOND PIII clinical trial cost much less then the first one. They can now fall back on the work done, the trainings given and with a highly reduced effort, and internally tuned procedures start this up.

Remember, giving away only 10% of the pipeline for a price X, as an alternative financing, is something you can NEVER catch up any more with leverage because whatever leverage you manage to realize it will for those 10% of the shares end up in the pockets of BP.

So I vote YES and want the leverage in MY pockets not in BPs pockets because I invested over the long term and feel to be entitled to that leverage rather then someone that buys in at ridiculous low prices not recognizing the leverage and then capitalizing on it anyway. Only the BoD/management can keep this from happening, but not if we dry them out because we think they are over compensated. If so it is there compensation we need to fight, not handicap the complete company by taking away its means of financing that are much better then loans and breadcrumb pipeline or IP encumbering deals.