biOasis Technologies Ord Shs V.BTI.H

Forcing Bioasis to Answer

[Boomskid]

As you know, I have not stated on here how I think people should vote. In fact, I have stated that unless the consequences of a "No" vote are known, it's dangerous to vote "No" because of the Lind foreclosure possibilities and the subsequent loss of Bioasis intellectual properties.

I could read the hundreds of pages in the dozens of documents that Bioasis has posted to SEDAR. I may even be able to correctly figure out what would happen with a "No" vote. But I can't and won't give legal advice or even express my opinion about this in public.

It's a question for Bioasis to answer. Bioasis management and Graeme at Colwell have a responsibility to answer, in full, the question about the consequences of voting "no."

My understanding is that when asked the question, GD's response is that "There is no Plan B."

That response is cavalier and meaningless. He should be ashamed of it. Using the analogy of chess, the king can be in check or can be checkmated. With a checkmate there is no Plan B. You've been beaten. If you're in check then you have moves that may or may not save you.

Bioasis shareholders need to know whether they've been checkmated, to be told whether a "No" vote will cause the certain loss of xB3 and all of Bioasis's IP to Lind. 

To say there is "no Plan B" can mean that there may be no Plan B but one could be formed and executed. Or "no Plan B" could mean that there is no possible Plan B that would save Bioasis from this deal.

Graeme needs to be given instructions by Bioasis on how to ACCURATELY answer all questions about the deal, including questions about Lind's rights, the payouts for cancelling the deal and other costs associated with exiting the deal.

Calls to and from Graeme and Zoom calls with Dr. Deborah Rathjen need to focus on the unequivocal answers to these questions and not on the obfuscation of "There is no Plan B."

Hold their feet to the fire in your calls to them!!

And remember, if you've already voted, you can change your vote if new and more complete information is available to you.

And it's not enough for Bioasis to say that everything you need to know is in the dozens of legal documents with hundreds of pages to be found on SEDAR and in other filings by Midatech and others. It might be legally enough, but hiding behind that law is not an expression of faithfulness to shareholders. 

jd