Qiagen, page-12

What more information are you looking for they have 'refused' to supply? In fact, specifically what information have you, or are you aware of, that has been asked for and flatly refused from the management at ADO? Very curious to see what you (and maybe others) feel we are entitled to that we have asked for and been refused.

From the quarterly supplied by ADO:
"Recently we entered into an association with Qiagen, who produce a reader that is used by groups developing fluorescent or colourimetric lateral flow tests. In this partnership, Qiagen will purchase Anteo's AMG™ Coupling Kit, 200 nm Magnetic Particles, to bundle with every ESEQuant LR3 Lateral Flow Reader sold."

They have defined it as a partnership whereby Qiagen will supply our product with every one of their ESEQuant LR3 sold. Is this required to be announced on the ASX or even reported to them?

The rule as far as continuous disclosure as follows:
Immediate notice of material information
General Rule
3.1 Once an entity is or becomes aware of any information concerning it that a reasonable person would expect to have a material effect on the price or value the entity's securities, the entity must immediately tell ASX that information

So maybe they told the ASX and they (ASX) didn't deem it would have a material effect on the price/value (and to date it hasn't). Maybe they didn't because they have seen it as non-material. As it has now been reported in the quarterly, whatever they did, I'd say the ASX is ok with.

Either way, the business has been transparent about what they're doing. The information is there and if you can't gleen from it what the association/partnership/customer relationship is from what they have told us, I'd suggest read it again. Maybe it isn't ann worthy because there is no contractual agreement outside of a typical supplier agreement and neither party is required to continue the relationship if they don't deem it successful.

Funny thing is, if management tried to get a bit more detailed on this arrangement with Qiagen and predicted an expected revenue and then didn't hit it, they would get absolutely slammed. Never mind if it were still a good outcome, if they didn't hit the target, hangings would follow in forums like HC.

Breadcrumbs for the astute? Fish slap across the face in my opinion. Even the most layman investor can read the quarterly and see the information about Qiagen (and Scienion for that matter).

Now before everyone goes crying about slamming someone for having an opposing or negative opinion, that isn't what I've just done. I've posted an opposing or positive opinion to a post which I'm pretty sure is how good discussion in an open forum is meant to work.

Thanks for posting Bullsbears. I don't agree with you, but appreciate you taking the time to put a thought together and share it.