Proteome Sciences. AGM Statement.

Glenn, I simply have a problem with this IP argument.

I am sure some of it may be useful, but there seem to be too many people ascribing huge valuations to it. Maybe this is as a result of not really knowing how the business works and just thinking because it sounds complicated, it must be particularly special.

All PRM are doing, is trying to invent a better mousetrap, or series of mousetraps. But just because it is better, doesn't mean the company can charge a million pounds for it when Woolworths are selling three for a pound.

But what particularly irks me, is the presumption that the company has to announce 'failures'. It doesn't. If nobody is interested in buying their IP for whatever reason, then Pearce doesn't have to disclose it to the market. The whole of PRM's library could be completely useless, yet people might labour under the impression that it has vast IP.

I find it impossible to believe that not one thing has gone wrong at PRM (apart from Biosite which they were forced to disclose). Thus, not disclosing one thing that hasn't proved as good as the hype leads one to the obvious conclusion that Pearce is massaging the news. Some would call this businesslike, some would call it underhand. But as time goes on, it appears he is doing this (or rather not doing anything) frequently.

If one believes that PRM has sewn up the diagnostics market for the future then fine, but there seems to be very little skepticism among the PRM faithful. And that will be their downfall.