VXRT Vaxart Inc

$VXRT Steve Lo Report Card The grades are in after 2.5+ years. 1. Shareholder Value: F Shareholder value has declined 65% under his watch. This is ultimately the most important measure of a CEO's performance. 2. Dilution: C Lo deserves credit for the Lincoln Park Capital financing, the resumption of the BARDA program following the stop-work order, and the additional $29 million from BARDA. And no r/s, so far. Those are meaningful accomplishments and should be acknowledged. However, they don't erase the damage caused by delisting, which fundamentally altered market liquidity, institutional eligibility, and shareholder value. 3. Clinical Execution: Successful and timely achievement of clinical trial milestones. Milestones? We don’t know what they are. Successful? To be determined. Timely? F. Shareholders need more than promising presentations and optimistic projections. We need measurable progress, completed milestones, and timelines that management can consistently meet. We need clear answers about the norovirus program, including whether the company has developed a new construct that adequately addresses GII.17. We also need clarity on the influenza program, its development timeline, and the company's overall clinical priorities. Clinical development is difficult, and setbacks happen. But repeated delays, limited visibility, and uncertainty about development timelines make it difficult for shareholders to evaluate management's performance. Or is this uncertainty by design, so shareholders don’t have the information to properly weigh management’s performance? 4. Executive Compensation: Compensation tied to independently measurable performance and tangible results. Grade: F Lo received a 35% higher compensation package in 2025 for a 44% decline in the stock in 2024 since he took over. Outrageous. Compensation should reflect performance, not simply the passage of time or continued occupancy of the CEO's office. Stock awards and options do not automatically create alignment with shareholders, particularly when they are awarded at depressed stock prices. Management compensation should be tied to independently measurable clinical, financial, operational, and shareholder-value milestones. 5. Transparency: Clear, honest, and timely communication regarding clinical setbacks, financing needs, business strategy, and development milestones. Grade: D To their credit, management is making an effort with the shareholder Fireside Chats. However, the current approach leaves much to be desired: 1. No follow-up questions during calls or Fireside Chats. 2. Cherry-picking shareholder questions. 3. Lo discussing the company's timeline to market with the media without telling shareholders. 4. No clear explanation of the strategy and milestones required to regain Nasdaq listing compliance. 5. No plan whatsoever communicated to shareholders, other than focusing on the data. 6. Private conversations with select shareholders. All of these contribute to a disconnect between management and retail. Shareholders should not have to piece together the company's strategy from interviews, conferences, regulatory filings, and carefully selected questions during Fireside Chats. Transparency means proactively communicating difficult information, not simply providing updates when management chooses. 6. Leadership and Accountability: Taking ownership of decisions and accepting responsibility for results. Grade: F Shareholders expect a CEO who acknowledges mistakes, explains strategic decisions, takes responsibility for setbacks, and demonstrates a credible plan for moving the company forward. Leadership is not just about presenting the company's potential. It is about delivering results. Overall grade? Draw your own conclusions. Shareholders should demand the following: 1. An independent evaluation of leadership. 2. A credible plan for shareholder value creation. 3. Honest and timely communication. 4. Measurable clinical milestones. 5. Compensation tied to results. 6. Greater shareholder engagement. 7. Stronger board oversight. Bottom Line Steve Lo inherited Vaxart with significant challenges, and it’s not fair to attribute every past mistake or controversial decision to him. However, that cannot become an excuse for the lack of shareholder returns, continued uncertainty, and inadequate communication. The most important question: Are we better off today than we were when Lo took over? The answer: Shareholders have experienced a 65% decline in the company's stock, while Lo's compensation increased 35%: Lo compensation 2024: $2,085,768 Lo compensation 2025: $2,810,918 Contrast his pay increase with declining shareholder value: • March 18, 2024 (day he began) to year-end 2024: 44% decline. • 2025: 47% decline. • Overall March 18, 2024 to Nov. 2, 2026: 65% decline. Lo must be held accountable for the company's performance under his leadership. Shareholders tried to hold him accountable at the 2026 Annual Meeting, where he had 49.7% of votes withheld, EVEN WITHOUT the Gold Cards, which would have easily put him over 50% withheld. When Nasdaq suspended Vaxart on July 8, 2025, the BARDA award was still valued at $460.7 million. Research indicates that no other publicly traded biotechnology company has ever received a government award of that magnitude and subsequently lost its Nasdaq listing. The Board got greedy with financial engineering, and it backfired. And now we have five of those members still on the Board, and we’re trading on OTC where it seems as though catalysts have no impact, although the jury is still out for a large catalyst. After Lo’s 2.5 years at the helm, we have nothing to show for our investment other than continued losses, delisting, no institutional interest, two failed reverse split proposals, and uncertainty about the company's path forward. If Lo doesn’t deliver by the Annual Meeting, he and a couple members of the Board likely won’t have the votes. And this time, a shareholder won’t be able to save Lo’s job by writing the framework for the CSG settlement, thus paving the way for the Board to pay for the Gold Cards to go away. Lo could have likely raised significantly funds on June 13, 2024 if he would’ve let us run. But instead, he put us in a hole with minimum leverage in the Dynavax deal, as we had to sell our most advanced asset, a vaccine that’s cross-reactive to all coronaviruses, including the common cold, and might also work therapeutically for Long Covid. And this is the guy who’s going to take us to the promised land? In what world does he still have his job? We deserve better. We deserve results.

$VXRT I just sent this to IR… LETTER TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Dear Board of Directors, After years of shareholder frustration, the Board has adopted a director stock ownership policy. This is an overdue, welcome step toward aligning the interests of the Board with shareholders. However, the critical question remains unanswered: Will this policy actually hold directors accountable, or is it another carefully constructed governance exercise that creates the appearance of accountability without imposing any meaningful consequences? When directors repeatedly receive cash compensation and equity awards while shareholders bear the consequences of a declining stock price, the absence of personal investment becomes a legitimate governance concern. Directors need their own skin in the game. However, as far as we can tell, Mr. Wheadon has not purchased any Vaxart shares during his 5.5 years on the Board. When will he be required to comply, and what are the consequences if he doesn’t? Shareholders deserve a direct answer, not vague statements or promises to provide details later. In September 2025, you announced you were working toward adopting a director stock ownership policy. The policy was subsequently approved on September 3, 2026. Nearly a year elapsed between the announcement of the initiative and formal approval, and it seems as though the only reason it was approved was because of the settlement with the Concerned Shareholders Group. Shareholders are still waiting for the complete policy text and a clear explanation of enforcement. You indicated in the September 14th 8K that the full policy would be included as an exhibit to the next periodic report. When can we expect that report? Will it include the consequences for failing to comply? Will you identify directors who fall short of the target? Will you explain the transition period? Will you disclose whether extensions are available? Will shareholders be told what happens if a director repeatedly fails to meet the requirement? These are not unreasonable demands. They are basic questions about a policy you adopted. A stock ownership policy without transparent enforcement provisions is not meaningful accountability. Moreover, the composition of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee makes the enforcement question particularly important. Mr. Wheadon is a member of the committee responsible for governance matters. That creates an obvious question about how the Board will ensure that any review of persistent director non-compliance is objective, independent, and credible. If a committee member's own compliance is under review, what safeguards prevent a perceived conflict of interest? Will the director concerned recuse himself from deliberations about his own compliance? Will the remaining committee members document their decision? Will shareholders receive an explanation of the outcome? A credible governance policy should anticipate these questions rather than leave shareholders to speculate. If ownership rules allow directors time to accumulate the required holdings, we are entitled to ask whether the transition period is proportionate, whether it applies equally to all directors, and whether extensions are governed by objective criteria. If a director can remain in office for years without meeting the target, while receiving cash compensation throughout that period, the Board must explain how that outcome advances shareholder alignment. In addition, if the consequences include receiving future compensation in stock, how does that address the underlying concern about accountability? How does this align with shareholders? Perception is reality, and potentially allowing Board members to circumvent compliance by receiving stock instead of cash would be an injustice to shareholders, and further erode trust. In addition, if persistent non-compliance can influence a director's re-nomination, we deserve to know who makes that determination, under what standards, and with what safeguards against conflicts of interest. As shareholders, we cannot vote ourselves cash retainers or grant ourselves RSUs. If you claim to be aligned with investors, you should be prepared to explain exactly how alignment is measured, how much qualifying stock each director holds, and what happens if a director falls short. Alignment cannot be established by rhetoric alone. It must be demonstrated through transparent, enforceable standards. A policy is only as credible as the consequences attached to it. The Board should publicly address the following questions: 1. Publish the complete policy. When will the full Director Stock Ownership Policy be made available, including all transition periods, valuation rules, exceptions, and enforcement provisions? 2. Disclose compliance status. Will Vaxart report whether each director has met the ownership target, using clearly defined qualifying holdings and valuation dates? 3. Explain the deadlines. Is December 31, 2026, the date by which directors must fully comply, or merely a measurement date within a longer transition period? 4. Clarify the consequences. What happens if a director fails to meet the target? Are future retainers paid in equity, are share sales restricted, or can persistent non-compliance affect re-nomination? Which of these provisions actually appear in the adopted policy? 5. Address extensions. Who may grant an extension, on what grounds, and for how long? Will the company disclose any extension granted? 6. Resolve conflicts of interest. What procedures apply when a member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is subject to a compliance review? 7. Explain director alignment. Will the Board disclose the number and value of qualifying shares held by each director, separately identifying RSUs, options, and shares acquired through open-market purchases? 8. Account for compensation. How does the Board justify its compensation arrangements in light of the company's shareholder-value performance? What objective measures does it use to evaluate whether directors' compensation is commensurate with the company's progress and governance needs? These questions should not require months of additional waiting. The Board already has the information necessary to explain its own policy. The purpose of a director ownership policy should be straightforward: to encourage directors to have a meaningful financial interest in the company and to establish clear expectations for compliance. It should not become a mechanism through which directors receive years of additional time, unclear exceptions, and with no meaningful consequences. Nor should shareholders have to rely on guesswork to determine whether a policy is enforceable. If you believe ownership requirements are fair, then publish them in full. If you believe the transition period is appropriate, then explain why. If you believe directors are aligned with shareholders, then demonstrate that alignment with verifiable figures. Also, if you believe compensation and governance practices are justified by the company's performance, then shareholders deserve to hear your justification with facts rather than silence. Simply put, accountability begins by explaining your granted shares over the last five years, while shareholder value has decreased by over 90%. These actions create mistrust and anger, undermine your credibility, and represent the epitome of greed in corporate America. We own the company and pay your salaries. You work for us. We deserve to see the full ownership policy, and whether the Board has the will to enforce it—even if enforcement becomes personally inconvenient. Shareholders deserve answers—not ambiguity and silence. We understand you are under restraint by BARDA, but Mr. Lo recently told a member of the media that our technology won’t reach the market until late 2028 or 2029. Meanwhile, shareholders have been asking questions about the timeline for years. And yet, crickets. Why would Mr. Lo tell the media but not his own investors? His statement was disrespectful to shareholders. And to top it off, Mr. Lo recently told shareholders to “stick with us.” All this said, we are heartened by the recent additions to the Board. Recruiting a Board member of Dr. Bono’s caliber was a stroke of genius. Congratulations for making that happen. In conclusion, we respectfully request accountability for directors, transparency for shareholders, and no more excuses. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Respectfully, 110 concerned Vaxart shareholders

$VXRT I just sent this. LETTER TO DR. BONO Dear Dr. Bono, Congratulations on your recent appointment to Vaxart’s Board of Directors. I’m ecstatic you’re on our Board. We need you. I've been a shareholder for 6.5 years, sitting on a significant loss. During that time, I've spent 4,000+ hours of my retirement researching Vaxart. I am writing to draw your attention to a landmark occupational health study published by Norway’s National Institute of Occupational Health (Statens arbeidsmiljøinstitutt – STAMI, STAMI-Rapport Årgang 27, Nr. 2, Feb 2026). Titled "Bioaerosols in the Wastewater Industry," this nationwide investigation provides critical quantitative data that directly reinforces the commercial rationale and mucosal mechanism for Vaxart’s bivalent Norovirus candidate. Summary of Key Study Findings 1. Pervasive Airborne Norovirus Emissions: The study quantified airborne viral contamination in municipal wastewater facilities, detecting nucleic acids from Norovirus Genogroup I (GI) and Norovirus Genogroup II (GII)—alongside adenovirus—in 22% of all air samples. Crucially, airborne Norovirus GI and GII were present at concentrations sufficient to cause clinical disease via bioaerosol inhalation. 2. Indicator Virus Validation: Pepper mild mottle virus (a surrogate indicator for human fecal viral pollution) was detected in 69% of air samples, establishing that Norovirus and other enteric pathogens are broadly aerosolized and suspended in indoor work environments. 3. Elevated Worker Morbidity: Exposed workers demonstrated statistically significant increases in gastrointestinal disease (diarrhea, abdominal cramps, nausea), respiratory symptoms, and systemic inflammatory responses compared to unexposed controls. 4. Failure of Traditional Engineering Mitigations: Norovirus exposure and strong immune activation (85% TLR2 / 91% TLR4 activation) occurred despite standard industrial control measures, including local exhaust ventilation, physical covers over basins, and workplace laundry rules. Direct Strategic Fit for Vaxart’s Bivalent Norovirus Pill The STAMI study provides epidemiological proof of an overlooked, high-risk sector: Municipal utility and sanitation workers facing continuous airborne exposure to Norovirus. This finding aligns with Vaxart’s core value proposition: • Exact Pathogen Match (GI & GII): The study highlights Norovirus GI and GII as the dominant viral threats in wastewater bioaerosols. Vaxart’s lead candidate is specifically engineered as a bivalent oral tablet targeting both GI and GII genogroups, matching the precise viral strains identified in the field. • Mucosal Immunity vs. Aerosolized Inhalation: Vaxart’s oral tablet targets the small intestine to generate robust local mucosal IgA antibodies, offering superior protection against aerosolized Norovirus. • Expansion of Vaccination Mandates: Norwegian wastewater workers currently have statutory rights to workplace immunizations for Hepatitis A/B, Polio, and Tetanus. The STAMI data lays the ground for adding Norovirus vaccination to occupational safety mandates across European and U.S. utility workers, opening an institutional purchasing market. Vaxart’s Communications Bottleneck & Untapped Opportunities While Vaxart possesses a differentiated asset in its bivalent Norovirus candidate, there is an ongoing operational short-fall: Vaxart routinely fails to capitalize on major market news, regulatory shifts, and published scientific studies via formal press releases. Too often, key external validation—such as major public health reports, peer-reviewed bioaerosol findings, or expanding epidemiological data for Norovirus—is either passed over entirely or mentioned in passing on social media platforms. Relying on informal social channels rather than structured press releases and targeted investor outreach creates several key disadvantages: 1. Capital Markets Remain In the Dark: Investors, analysts, and institutional funds remain unaware of expanding Total Addressable Markets (TAM) outside of traditional cruise ship or daycare outbreak narratives. 2. Missed Non-Dilutive Funding Opportunities: Agencies such as BARDA, NIOSH, the NIH, and European occupational health funds (EU-OSHA) allocate grants for protecting critical infrastructure workers. By failing to formally communicate how Vaxart’s Norovirus tablet solves industrial aerosol exposure, the company forfeits non-dilutive grant funding. 3. Underutilized Health-Economics Narrative: Demonstrating that a Norovirus pill can reduce worker absenteeism and municipal disability claims gives Vaxart strong leverage with institutional buyers—a story that must be driven through proactive corporate messaging. Suggestions for the Board As Chair of the Stockholder Engagement Committee and a member of the Clinical and Regulatory Affairs Committee, your leadership can help bridge this gap: • Establish a Proactive PR Protocol: Direct corporate communications to issue formal press releases when external scientific data (such as the STAMI Norovirus GI/GII findings) validates Vaxart’s target indications and platform capabilities. • Pursue Occupational Health Non-Dilutive Grants: Direct management to engage municipal labor unions and public health agencies in the U.S. and Europe to explore grant-funded trials for high-risk worker cohorts. • Amplify Bivalent Norovirus Positioning: Update investor presentations to explicitly emphasize Vaxart’s dual GI/GII coverage for bioaerosol and environmental exposure pathways. Vaxart’s bivalent oral Norovirus tablet has the potential to address an unfulfilled global health need. Aligning Vaxart's public communications with real-world scientific data will help unlock the market recognition and funding opportunities the platform deserves. In conclusion, thank you for bringing your leadership, experience, and commitment to strong corporate governance to Vaxart. We are lucky to have you, and look forward to the positive impact you can make for the company and its shareholders. Sincerely, JJ __________________ (Thanks to for the link to the Norway study).

$VXRT Don’t forget: There is only one fundamental reason for why this share price is at an abysmal $0.40. They always wanted and still want an RS. It is the same reason for why Lo is still here. Florious task: Make it appear as if Vaxart is a “normal” company owned by shareholders, subject to market forces. Los task: Make said (retail) shareholder disappear by hiding or suppressing any information that would impact the SP positively and then say we need an RS.

$VXRT it makes absolutely no difference what questions you submit they’re gonna only talk about what they wanna talk about and basically tell us nothing….

$VXRT not sure if this has been pointed out, but BARDA's Project NextGen is a participating consortium in this international initiative... Considering we're the only large scale dataset within PNG, we are, by default (IMO), also a large part of this effort. This is huge international validation and ultimately aims to build the infrastructure needed to support regulatory approval of mucosal correlates (Vaxart's biggest obstacle). Considering our upcoming data readout and schedule EOP2 with the FDA, the timing is quite favorable 🙌🏽 Between Fred Hutch's work here in the US and now this international effort, the stage sure seems to be set for much more investments flowing into mucosal platforms. "We are the leaders here. "

$VXRT My 'Notional' chart running in excel... I query otc markets webpage and scrape every minute the orders on the Bid and Ask side and keep track of the last sold price, right side numbers (red line)... What does this show? it shows an Ask chart over a Bid chart, minute by minute.. it shows the minute by minute manipulation (if it's happening) and who the trading brokers are... It shows the bid volume and ask volume (orders not yet filled) it shows the current consolidated $$ for bid and ask left side numbers for 4 days .. in other words who is shorting this and controlling it.... I hope to get this so it updates a picture to my 'Drive' every hour.. How does it help you? you may be able to use it to see where the pressure is and if you should buy today or tomorrow.. IT IS NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE.. just a small piece of information to level the corruption on your investment.

$VXRT Lo valued ALL of our shares at $.80. That is what our CEO SOLD SHARES OF VAXART FOR. It’s incomprehensible that he is still the CEO. There is no trust and I have no interest in hearing him lie and cheat his way to convince us to RS. What ever he tries to tell you our shares are worth…its alot more.

$VXRT Fire the Ceo! Fireside chat Question from every caller should be: Do to Lo performance he should fired , 2.5 yrs he brought no value an needs to be replaced? Performance base is F Every caller need have same mind question fire the ceo off performance base!

$VXRT Submitted the following questions to IR for this week's fireside chat: - For years now, there have been very few insider buys of Vaxart stock. With the share price recently touching $0.39, how can shareholders be expected to have faith in this investment and leadership team when it seems that the board and executive leadership don’t believe in the stock enough to invest their own funds? I understand that blackout periods happen, but it’s been years cumulatively of this same issue. Why aren’t insiders buying material volumes of stock at these prices? - It’s been four months since the initial limited release of data from the P2B sentinel group. While top line safety and side effect profile was impressive, what most investors are interested in is underlying data such as immunogenicity, viral load, shedding, and severity of infections. Please provide a clear answer to the following questions: (1) Has Vaxart, BARDA, Sanofi, or any other entity seen this more detailed sentinel data yet? How about detailed full P2B data? (2) With the long wait for full P2B data expected to run into 2H 2027, can shareholders at least expect to see more detailed sentinel data before end of year? If not, is it being withheld by BARDA or is it Vaxart’s decision to withhold it? - With the recent additions of Dr. Breitmeyer (oncology) and Admiral Bono (cruise industry and healthcare background fit for advancing Noro), can shareholders expect to see a broadening of the pipeline in the coming months? How extensively is Vaxart pursuing additional pipelines while awaiting Covid P2B full results? - What specific efforts is Vaxart making to obtain non-dilutive funding to ensure we can at least reach the P2B data readout prior to considering dilution? Shareholders want to know that you are fighting to protect us, but we are not receiving any signals from leadership that this is happening. Please provide an update of efforts. - Many shareholders, including myself, continue to believe that a Norovirus vaccine would be among the most valuable advancements for the company and the stock. It has now been 17 months since the impressive Phase 1 results from the Noro trial were released, yet we still have not received any meaningful update on a partnership or other means of advancing the pipeline. Shareholders want and expect a more detailed update on progress and efforts, as well as some measure of accountability for the board and executive leadership. At this point, simply stating that you are pursuing non-dilutive funding without any further detail is no longer an adequate answer. - As part of the CSG settlement, Vaxart agreed to form a Shareholder Advisory Council. Will this be limited to only CSG members, or will it be opened up for other shareholders to request being considered to serve as well? It is my hope that Vaxart will work to ensure that a broad range of ideas, concerns, and viewpoints are represented.

$VXRT Question 1. CEO performance: After approximately 2.5 years under your leadership, what measurable accomplishments can you point to that have created tangible shareholder value? 2. Accountability: If shareholders have seen little or no improvement in their investment, why should they continue to have confidence in the current leadership? 3. 90-day deadline: Would the CEO and Board agree to a clearly defined 90-day performance review, with specific milestones and consequences if those milestones are missed? 4. Partnerships: What concrete progress has management made toward securing a meaningful pharmaceutical partnership, licensing agreement, or strategic transaction 5. Board responsibility: At what point does the Board conclude that a change in executive leadership is necessary to protect shareholder interests 6. Compensation: How does the Board justify executive compensation when shareholders have experienced significant losses / continued uncertainty

$VXRT Sanofi has been tying up loose ends for a few months now. I think they've found a winner and so have we....

$VXRT Steven Lo is an incompetent idiot, He’ll probably throw us a few crumbs during the fireside chat to keep our hopes alive and buy himself more time. Don’t fall for it.

$VXRT it’s been a long time since I got an email from simply st about vxrt. $4 is a good start to be recognized.

$VXRT I’ve never made one correct prediction here but I do believe the SP is going to be significantly higher this month.

$VXRT At least they responded that my questions were received…I have to imagine there are a ton of duplicates/triplicates

$VXRT as highczech always says...the best kept undiscovered, undercover, undisclosed, not promoted, ignored by the company, overlooked by the market, showcasing company apathy and incompetence, slow to market, company could give a shit, secret ever.

$VXRT When does the time come where Vaxart true value is unveiled, is it looming with NVIPS deadline approaching this month ? Experienced deal maker Breightmeyer arrived in April, not long after the ( Feb) Sanofi deal for Dynavax was completed. Has he been busy structuring a deal and now alerting all players ? Vaxart now to be valued correctly as a platform rather than Covid only play alone ? Is this why Noro not progressed as it’s a whole package approach prefers ? Has the risk v reward now been skewed to set off a bidding war, who can afford to ignore the vaccine landscape potentially changing beyond recognition ? Warchests of billions to address patent cliffs, the big players desire has already seen big moves and big promises for the future,who wants to own the oral vaccine revolution ? SOMETHING ONLY WORTH WHAT SOMEBODY IS PREPARED TO PAY FOR IT

$VXRT NO POCKET CHANGE WILL BE EXCEPTED! Get real. WE have stuck together for 6 years. Do you think we would stop NOW? NFW!

$VXRT I was told by the Doc... we can decrease the blood pressure meds when VXRT releases the data. However... Im cautious about decreasing the pills im taking because of the Wife.. Love ya Sweetie! Hang in there y'all