A little taste before mains?, page-23

Kiwiinvestor, thanks for your feedback and you made a very good point which I didn't pick up on.

Ie A switch between MST utilising the Licence modelling in their earlier report and now, moving more towards a sales/distribution arrangement.

There hasn't been anything official so it's prob more speculation rather than a PAR move or any vibes being picked up. This to me appears to be a speculation but also admission to at least some degree that we are more serious, we have progressed and we are in more of a position of power as we progress.

Getting past a Pre IND for OA WITHOUT any major issues is a boon for us. Add to this fact that we don't need Phase III to have patient numbers in the multi thousands AND that our Secondary endpoints have been virtually accepted for our Third Phase endpoints, you can see a glimpse of our stature. Add this to the fact that its not just FDA but EMA we are contending with and the global stage starts to become visible in the distance.

Ok so getting to the point...this means it's better for us...A typical Big Pharma licencing deal involves around 20% royalty back to us (though I reckon we could surely negotiate this up a notch yeah?) with upfront and progressive milestone payments in the multi millions. A Sales/ Distribution is more like a joint venture...getting TNT to deliver our goods rather than using a couple of rented vans and the odd scooter could be an analogy of sorts? I mean using a large Pharma (like I have postulated using J & J as an example in the past), yes we pay for their services but finally it is our product, our commercial IP and thus at the end of the day more retained profits for us? We just pay for the services and their established distribution channel.

Happy to hear yours and others thoughts on this.

eg. one question I could ask - Are there any disadvantages of a Sales/Distribution model compared to a Licencing model that anyone knows about?