another article regarding the merger

Hi PLT'ers,

I came across another article regarding the Polartechnics & Fermiscan merger, which appears to be old (20th March) and yet I don't remember reading it previously. If someone else posted it at some stage then apologies.

Site: Biotech Daily

Title: MARC SINATRA’S BIOGUIDE BRIEF: POLARTECHNICS, FERMISCAN

Link:

http://www.biotechdaily.com.au/media/backissues/2009%20April/BD%20Biotech%20Daily%20April%2020.pdf

It has some interesting comments, plus some that are less than flattering towards the end, but not really an issue when you look at what is being said and how little the 'journalist' knows about Polartechnics (not very much). I suspect it's the same in case of the criticism of Fermiscan. I'll post the same at some stage on the FER site to see if anyone can shed some light from the Fermiscan angle.

The questionable bits about Polartechnics are in fact what has already been aired on this forum in the past:
1. a question mark about forecast revenues, compared to the 2008 result.
2. the possibility of the consumables (SUS's) being copied in China or India

In my opinion:
1. if you know the Polartechnics story, 2008 was the very start of Truscreen finally selling (& they stopped mucking about with cosmetics). 2009 is a better story, but still hamstrung by lack of SUS production capability. 2010 onwards is where supply-chain issues should be sorted out, and truckloads of Truscreen units are sold requiring containerloads of SUS's! + CerviScreen sells more in Asia & gets launched & heavily promoted

2. if a Chinese factory couldn't do the SUS's properly given PLT's specifications, guidance and assistance (for at least half a year or more) and the lenses still needed to be done in the U.S., what hope does a bootlegger have in doing it on the sly?!!

Cheers.