In @Buckland 's defence, there was talk of another company who managed to do a deal before the PAA option was not taken up. Only the inner sanctum of VM knows whether the prior deal had anything to do with rejection of PAA. Did it bring VM to saturation point given the merger? Was it superior (clinically, financially, time to first revenue, etc?) To get straight answers from VM here would be very nice, but I doubt they will ever come to light
PAA Price at posting:
9.4¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
