Thanks for posting @spnc but I maintain that the parts you've...

Thanks for posting @spnc but I maintain that the parts you've highlighted illustrate exactly what I'm saying- that it all sounds great if you don't know the company but raises more questions than it answers if you do.

Now I realise that (a) it's written for the average AFR reader who doesn't know the company and (b) they're limited for space, but (as is obvious given I'm writing so much) I find the whole journalistic tone highly annoying

Let me pick on three key paragraphs to explain why.

“We’ve been pushing Telix to build that pipeline,” Ogden says, adding it is about positioning the business for where it will be in five years. Telix is going down that path, and the R&D program features heavily in its presentation to investors this week.

OK I don't want to pay out on Ogden but "see it treat it" was company philosophy from the very beginning, and while CB has honed the message over the years, I'm bemused that anyone outside the company feels any sort of ownership of that. "Do that thing you said you were always going to do" is not that deep a comment.  Neither Ogden or Bannon, the other expert quoted, said anything of any real insight.

But building such a pipeline of treatments does not come cheap, and would require significant investment in manufacturing, sales, supply chains and the like.

But I thought that's what they've been doing. Again, none of this rings true if you know the company, here are some questions:

- I thought they'd been scaling up for Prostact already? I thought demonstrating scale-up was a precondition for approval?

- CB has already said that there should be not too much additional spending on marketing and supply chain management for Zircaix. Surely this would also be the case for 592.

- In any case, there's a growing revenue base to pay for all this stuff.

- Given that being self-funding is such a strong selling point and a point of pride, it's a big sell to suddenly pivot to a raise just to do the things you were going to do. (and at the risk of being really snarky, if CB is annoyed the share price isn't higher, maybe he should remember that time when he killed price momentum by raising capital and selling shares.)

And that is why Telix needs to go to the US capital markets, according to Ogden, to be closer to the institutional investors who are looking at these sorts of radiopharma deals and companies every day.

And that is a complete load. Look at all the corporate deals Telix has been making in the last few years. The article does not answer the key question: what would they be able to do that they can't do now. "Closer to institutional investors" does not mean anything. Firstly, Telix has a strong physical presence in the US. Secondly, has no-one heard of globalisation? ASX companies- including bios- get bought out all the time.

If you ever wanted a textbook case showing the AFR is a waste of space this is why:

- It glowingly regurgitates a corporate line without asking any questions
- It uses the reputation of experts to reinforce that corporate line even though the experts say nothing of any insight whatsoever.
- It makes this-is-so points that sound reasonable but require much deeper justification to anyone that has any knowledge about the company.

It is not journalism. It is a puff piece. It is marketing.

So to me the question is: marketing to whom? Because, if it's in part directed at shareholders, then it's disingenuous and an insult.