Great post, and agree with most statements. As an early...

Great post, and agree with most statements. As an early shareholder of both, I also want them both to continue to do well.

One point though - You say this: "So far they’ve made all their money off a generic product and frankly what they’re pushing in the media at the moment is light on the toddler tantrum front. It’s got nothing to do with product quality safety etc. just protecting their profits and maximise their revenue.". You also mention "Novartis' exorbitant prices".

Of course Telix needs to protect their profits, revenue, and shareholders. However, they do also care about patients. These two things aren't mutually exclusive. Please let's remember why they started the company. By extension, I wouldn't characterise their actions and statements as akin to a "toddler tantrum".

CU6 is not morally superior. It's just 5 years behind Telix in the development pathway. CU6 also needs to protect its projected profits and revenue, and current/future shareholders. Hence, the patent protection; the need to protect against any potential infringement down the track; and the need to maximise the value of any transaction with big pharma. With respect to the latter, we all know that the more a big pharma pays CU6 for their assets, the more patients will need to pay down the track to access those diagnostics/therapeutics (because naturally, BP will want to recover its costs). And yet, most of the discussion on the CU6 HC thread is about market cap, share price, with "big pharma better pay up" statements etc. We (and the CU6 team) all want to profit here and help patients with cancer, and I'm sure we would advocate that CU6 management deal with any scenario which jeopardized either/both of those things.

In any case, as I mentioned above, enjoyed and appreciated the post and discussion.