Hi Harvett, GSW, BB and Vintage,I am not sure whether BB has...

Hi Harvett, GSW, BB and Vintage,

I am not sure whether BB has been misunderstood. From my read, what he is really saying is that yes, it is most difficult to value technology like that owned by SBN without the sales to support the valuation. In this current environment, bluesky technology valuations (Valutec model) are out the window. That does not of course stop individual investors as GSW suggested forming their own valuation models but at the end of the day, the real value will inevitably equate to the list of credentials, IP and related sales that support the company's financial model. It is also worth remembering that the value of IP can often be valued quite differently depending on where or indeed in whose hands it actually resides. For instance, in the hands of an under resourced entity, a valuation may come in on the skinny side but with a multinational group with deep pockets and extensive market tentacles,the value could be many multiples. I guess this is what it is all about for SBN. The management know that they must continue to build a company asset register but at the same time, iniate IP related sales which I assume is why they have entered a JV with SiYi and master distribution agreements with ED, Bioscreens and Medinat just to name a few.

Technology valuations are rarely black and white but rather punctuated with many angles of attack. I think that BB makes a very valid point when he suggests that the real valuation of SBN will only occur when core sales grow to a level that supports and validates the IP and therefore potentially opening the door to time deficient suitors searching for entry into such an emerging market (saliva drug testing).

cheers