The following is an idiotic statement from PC in the Open...

The following is an idiotic statement from PC in the Open Briefing:

"We don??t believe the market has appreciated the significance of the BARDA contract, which
relates to a program that??s also largely derisked because of laninamivir??s approval in Japan"


I have to ask PC:

How can the market appriciate the significance of the BARDA contract while how BTA is going to share the benefit of Lani ROW is still not known to the public and Lani is co-owned by BTA and DS?

The BRADA grant is for Lani to be further developed and registered in the US. But we still do not know how the deal between BTA and DS will be and how the benefit of Lani in the ROW is to be shared between BTA and DS. Besides, It is not known that how BTA will produce Lani for the US market after Lani is approved for sale. There are just too many unknowns for Lani program in the US.

But what is konwn is that BTA has got another crappy deal for the Inavir in Japan although the detail of the deal is not released. So,the market is aware that the management may get another crappy deal for Lani in the ROW. That is the truth.

Lastly, It is the expected (maybe royalty) revenue from Lani sales in the ROW that will matter, not just the BARDA grant! With so many unknowns for Lani program, how can the market expects significant positive financial outcome will materialize for BTA?


Another idiotic statement from PC in the Open Briefing just follows the one mentioned above :

"While over the life of Biota shareholders have made a net contribution $70 million, we??ve just secured about three times that amount to allow us to take our second product through to market approval"

For this one, I do not want to say more about it, but anyone with some finance knowledge would easily rebut the statement.



Just my thoughts, no personal attack or offence is intended.