Peter Cook told shareholders that the last GSK offer was in 2006...

Peter Cook told shareholders that the last GSK offer was in 2006 which contradicted the fact GSK also offered to settle in 2007. GSK offered $100M plus costs in 2006 and in 2007 offered $75M plus costs. The idiots turned down both offers and settled for $20M after burning in excess of $35M legal costs. To further insult shareholders' intelligence, BTA stated that the GSK case was launched by Peter Molloy before Peter Cook joined BTA and if not for the legal costs, BTA would have made a profit for the 2007/08 financial year.

This is not the first time Peter Cook issued statements insulting shareholders intelligence or contradicted the truth or telling half truth or plain incompetence.

In August 2007; Peter Cook announced “profit in excess of $18M” to “exceeding $17M”. The press had a field day with the profit down grade and a week later BTA reported an after-tax profit in excess of $20M. Why the profit downgrade?

After Roche reported a sharp drop in quarterly Tamiflu sales, on 24 Oct 07 where shareholders were asked to vote for 121,258 free executive share options, Peter Cook explained there are “very viable ways for GSK to grow Relenza sales” and QUOTE “ There is therefore no reason to assume the down turn in volumes experienced by Roche with Tamiflu should be experienced by GSK with Relenza”. End of Quote
Less than 24 hours later, Peter Cook announced Relenza quarterly sales had dropped by 70% from $171.4M to $52.5M. To insult shareholders’ intelligence Peter Cook commented (QUOTE):”The Q1 figures are consistent with Biota’s expectation.”


In the 24 July 08 ASX announcement, when the Relenza sales fell to a paltry $6.2M Peter Cook said QUOTE “Whilst royalty is low, it reflects the off-season in the Northern hemisphere”. All those who know the Relenza market know that Relenza sales to the seasonal flu market is negligible and close to zero. Relenza sales were close to 100% to the Governments’ pandemic stockpiles. He probably was hoping all shareholders are stupid enough not to be able to calculate that the Relenza sales had plummeted 96% from the $158.2M June 07 same off-season quarter to the miserable $6.2M June 08 quarter. Clearly Peter Cook statement is at odds with the TRUTH and insulting to shareholders


Peter said in Aug 08 (QUOTE) “The share buyback was temporarily halted when the company become aware of impending licensing deals and important clinical trial updates”. The truth is BTA had been announcing news of clinical trials in the middle of the earlier buy backs. Even information on Relenza royalties which are fundamental to BTA’s income did not caused Peter Cook to suspend share buy backs. Peter Cook failed his duty to promptly inform shareholders of the suspension of the share buyback in Mid May. Instead on 30 May 08, BTA reported the share buybacks for the half month of May as for the whole month of May.

CONCLUSION:
Is Peter Cook a genius or a bumbling fool? The above is just the tip of the iceberg glimpsed from BTA documents! Let Peter Cook’s past performance be your guiding light - when Peter Cook joined OEC (Orbital Engine) as its CEO in late Dec 2001/Jan 2002, OEC shares were trading at about $0.70 When the great Peter Cook left in September 2005, OEC shares were trading around $0.10

FURTHER READING:
1) Peter Cook’s remunerations versus performance
http://www.hotcopper.com.au/post_single.asp?fid=1&tid=734273&msgno=3263783#3263783

2) Suspension of share buybacks and timing:
http://www.hotcopper.com.au/post_single.asp?fid=1&tid=734273&msgno=3263148#3263148
http://www.hotcopper.com.au/post_single.asp?fid=1&tid=741560&msgno=3300432#3300432

3) Future Relenza Royalties:
http://www.hotcopper.com.au/post_single.asp?fid=1&tid=738293&msgno=3278679#3278679