Just an opinion, could be wrong.
No matter how you paint the picture with the Board and Executives - looking at the website - take a look and you indentify each Director and Executive plus creditionals - Tony looks like a mate from WA - its all a bit vague in terms of who is who......... a lot of deck chairs.
imo it still is Jeff's company and he is not going to sacrifice the position created with P&G. It gives him prestige and a guaranteed income for some time.
Explosive development into new areas - forget it. It will put everything at risk for himself and his baby.
.....collaborations sure, a possibilty.
However all companies in that situation wantstheir pound of flesh along the way. Refer P&G. They took all the risk and the marketing costs - hence the commission to OBJ.
Imo shareholders need to take a realistic look at the business model and not the hype they associate to a company that uses the "technology"
Cosmetic products require no regulatory approvals - OBJ's technology is currently a marketing tool used to sell cosmetics along with many other marketing ingredients.
eg OLAY from my research..
WATER,
GLYCERIN,
TITANIUM DIOXIDE,
NIACINAMIDE, ACETYL
GLUCOSAMINE, ISOPROPYL LAUROYL SARCOSINATE, PANTHENOL, TOCOPHERYL ACETATE,
DIMETHICONE, DIMETHICONOL, TRIETHANOLAMINE, BENZYL
ALCOHOL, CARBOMER, BEHENYL
ALCOHOL, C13-14 ISOPARAFFIN, CETEARYL GLUCOSIDE, STEARYL
ALCOHOL, LAURETH-7, CETYL
ALCOHOL, PEG- ...
end result.......how many billions do you have to spend on marketing the concept?
OBJ imo is but one ingredient with a different form in the marketing mix, just like the above.
All good for you .....well thats up to the consumer. But, they are getting wiser and more informed.
View attachment 1622527
(20min delay)