more coverage, page-24

Bloomberg data. - Don't know enough about it but would be very interested if Ouisa could tell us if there is any more detail other than the base % volume that in any way tells us of teh current $ value size of teh market or teh actual number of units teh % volume actually equates to.

Well a rough IMS overview - not quite this simple - the IMS numbers are taken from the distributers ( doesn't come from drug company but some drug companies are distributers as well) and IMS verifies them in different ways including getting data from hospital buying groups and equivalent of health department numbers.

So they say they have sold 500 units by DrR. etc etc
The sales are codes to different market segments by your aussie equivalent of a provider number of the purchaser but IMS doesn't get all the detail ( ie no cleint list) but knows hospital, retail, region etc etc but not actual price just a headline price ( think RRP wholesale version)

A value may be apportioned to those units however there is often huge chargebacks so you can't trust the value numbers unless you know the market very well and know the real picture on discounts and schemes. Thus market size is not 100% clear as no one knows net % value.
IMS adds up all the distributers they deal with , does market size etc etc.

Chargebacks in the distribution industry. Occurs when the supplier sells a product at a higher price to the distributor than the price they have set with the end user. The distributor then submits a chargeback to the supplier so they can recover the money lost.

IMS is thus good for seeeing how a market changes and % of volume but only the drug maker themselves knows the true $ values of the sales net of all the schemes / chargebacks bonus paid direct to end user , incentives direct to end user or prescriber and then you have the company accounts and announcements that are a guide as no one will ever release raw data.

So companies pay big money to IMS ( or recriprical if they allow there data to be used) so they have a idea of the proportion of the existing market and any growth / shrinkage segments and the areas where that demand changing. Be wary of numbers in markets with only a couple of players and look for long term trends whilst confirming detail of bumps. The true retail value of a market is a number in $ that I have seen used here and in prospectus and it comes with a disclaimer for a very good reason the more I learn about how it is invented.

I got interested in it as with another chemical I couldn't get the numbers brokers ( company assisted with imformal guidance on real situation of market) were using and IMS were providing to be with in a mile of what I knew the numbers to be as I had access to a imput for that chemical. A lot was to do initially with stocking orders but many other factors like chargebacks , stockpiling etc was going on. When the market for that chemical matured the trend averaged out shown by IMS was closer but still had bumps in it.

The way I see it as for Questions not being answered it is very tough for any company coming under the umbrella of the Nasdaq listing to say anything outside the strict SEC filing process. The stupid thing is they could have said a lot more before filing a while back but the ACL fonda and retail holders are really 2nd class citizens in so many ways as the management see their future on the elephant hunt with a little cream on top from the Aussie listing. Read the SEC filing - I am surprised there hasn't been more comment on it.

Raising before IPO - door maybe open to do it as a option in the paperwork but would be really poor form by management hmmmmm. Want to be a high value small dillution deal if any as a taste fo someone they really want on the register and I just don't think this management have the ability to pull that off and keep other instos happy.

Is there any info on US forums regarding it yet?