The proposition that “QUOTE the risks had changed MARKEDLY,...

The proposition that “QUOTE the risks had changed MARKEDLY, MAINLY DUE to the postponing of the trial date End of Quote” reflects the same stupidity in rejecting the 2006 offer. It does not require wisdom of hindsight. Gillead and Roche had the common sense to settle. GSK had the wisdom to offer the settlement but sadly Biota blamed Peter Molloy.

How could the risks changed mainly because the trial date was postponed? Whether it is held today, tomorrow or in 2009, the parties still have to address the same legal issues which determined the duration of the court hearing and the strength of the case. The estimated duration of the trial and the possibility of an appeal is not affected by the postponement. Put bluntly it is the same bullsh!t fed to shareholders like blaming poor Relenza sales on the “off season Northern Hemisphere”. The risks will change if witnesses died or the laws changed, is Peter Cook suggesting these?

“Quote : Significant Relenza royalty flows emerging $54 million to date . Any favourable court award would deduct Relenza royalties received and discount future royalties. End of Quote”

The 2005 to 2008 antiviral market are now “actual historical data”, (If the court agree with the 40% claimed), the award would far exceed the $564M to $704M revised PLD.

The FUNDAMENTAL mathematics underpinning the Particular of Loss and Damage (PLD) is the 40% market share BTA claimed Relenza would achieve had it not been for GSK failure. If the court agrees, the deduction of $54M royalties received is peanuts compared to the possible award and mentioning the $54M deduction is very similar to blaming Peter Molloy for launching the case.

I agree that what had happened can not be undone and it is the future that is more important. However “the pasts” is an indicator of the future that nothing has changed. The same board will continue to feed shareholders the same bulsh!t all over again.

What is even worst is Peter Cook and his mates actually used these bulsh!t illogical logic for their management decisions. Put plainly, with a board filled with idiots, what hope is there for shareholders?

And despite the $20M GSK settlement, cash balance is reduced from $60.2M to $55M which equates to 31.5 cents per share "QUOTE: At the end of September our cash stood at $55.0 million End of Quote"

At the rate Peter Cook is burning cash, how long will the $55M last especially with Relenza royalty diving faster than a kamikazi plane.