CES 2019, page-152

I appreciate your thoughts on this topic smac and an interesting take on this situation to which I did consider the possibility briefly.  But didn't COTY have exclusivity on Dermaportation?  Jeff is on record as confirming that 'we never let an opportunity go by' ie COTY, otherwise it would have been communicated to the Market, especially considering that a formal agreement was in place........wouldn't it?

You may recall a question I posed for the April 2018 Conference Call:

You many also recall the response from OBJ Management:

For me, the response from OBJ Management in the recent Conference Call was dubious at best. To quote Jeff verbatim......'Shareholders should be aware that the ASX does not permit the company to announce or discuss any relationship that has not been formally cemented by a material agreement. In addition, the companies that we work with do not allow us to use their name or to discuss their business interests in any public forum until that relationship is also formalised and executed. As a result of these limitations, I can't comment specifically on any one of the companies on the list, other than to absolutely assure Shareholders that we never let an opportunity go. Umm, meetings are already in place with a number of these companies over the coming weeks following the success of the BodyGuard IBU Clinical Trial and the release of several beauty sub-categories from P&G's exclusivity that open up new market opportunities for the company. We continue to work actively with nine of the 12 ah companies that Shareholders have put in their list and discussions and evaluations with the remaining three have slowed primarily due to mergers, acquisitions, the divestment of brands or the removal of certain market categories from their portfolios.'

As much as Jeff's rehearsed response was appreciated by myself as the author of the question, unfortunately it now raises further pertinent questions:

If the ASX only allow discussion where a relationship has been formally cemented, then why has so much information been withheld from Shareholders for the already 'cemented material agreement' with P&G and subsequent announcements only released via OBJ's website?

And IF the Companies that OBJ work with do not allow OBJ to use their name or to discuss their business interests in any public forum until that relationship is also formalised and executed; then why was I able to compile a list of said companies by referring to OBJ ASX announcements?

https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/buy-the-fear-sell-the-greed.4126357/page-32?post_id=32410537

You may also remember this announcement in relation to COTY from 2014:

https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20141203/pdf/42v7fxhqtk0f5k.pdf

The above states it IS a FORMAL EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENT.

Wouldn't the market need to be updated if this is no longer the case and P&G's Olay FaceNavi Smart Wand now has the exclusivity?  Or are they now sharing exclusivity for their relevant proprietary molecules for delivery?  Or do the Olay FaceNavi Smart Wand and the COTY Philosophy Wand relate to completely different Dermaportation patents?

So if the Olay FaceNavi Smart Wand is indeed Dermaportation and not multi-MicroArray; then what happened to COTY and why wasn't the market informed?