5. at this point all we can say is our efficacy for 9 month 'failed to respond' ulcers is 16% which is 16% better than the competition. .................................................
At the moment that is ALL you can say. Your CEO went to the world market partners with ONLY that info. NO MORE.
No wonder they picked him up by the collar and bum and threw him out the door. There was nothing commercially worthwhile for the "partners". That is my point.
He went to the partners with the only efficacy data being (maybe 50%) + 16%. He went to the partners way out of his depth in understanding the size of the market, which he claims has now doubled. He went to the partners, telling us all only 3 weeks before meeting them, that he pretty much had it in the bag... all substantive terms met ... better outcome than I could ever expect .....blah blah.
He has made an absolute mess of this project. Shareholders should get together and introduce a resolution to have him sacked.
Now , to your other points.
You state: its clear to see the advantage of VitroGro if we have an efficacy of 60% or 70%. but what about say 40 or 50%. My question is: why would "partners" stump up millions for those POOR results( regardless of the humanitarian benefit). What's in it for them.
TIS Price at posting:
54.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
