Proteins still need to be bound to the surfaces you want to use in order for 3DNA technology to come into play and do its thing.
Our technology is about binding proteins to surfaces - if you can't bind proteins to the surfaces you want, then what good is 3DNA when it does not address that aspect of the test?
Yes, the use of 3DNA may potentially reduce the scope of products Mix 'n Go might be used in because they may be able to achieve sensitivity that is good enough in some circumstances; but the problem of consistently binding proteins to the surfaces you want will still exist for many other tests where 3DNA is not enough and this is why Mix 'n Go retains its unique value proposition.
How is it a selling point for BBI if customers say, "I want to bind this particular protein, to this particular surface" and BBI has to turn around and say, "No, sorry we can't do that, you cannot use the surface you want."
One way to think about it is that if you were an engineer in an F1 racing team, you wouldn't make one improvement, say adopting the use of KERS, but then say no to the use of DRS. You'd do everything you can to remain at the top... before your competitor does and knocks you off. That inevitably means that you will often need to adopt and combine multiple technologies to remain at the top.
