Dr Kelly is suggesting - in his latest musing - an arrangement...

Dr Kelly is suggesting - in his latest musing - an arrangement where NRT sells the package of isoflavinoid technlogy to MEI but retains ownership of the members of the chemical library that are confirmed to not have significant anti-cancer activity, plus first right of refusal to any new chemical entity subsequently identified by MEI that do not have significant anti-cancer activity and they choose not to develop further. NRT could continue researching and developing anti-inflammatory, cardivascular, etc drugs based on these entities. This rather than seeing a 100% ownership whittled down to a 5% interest via a shareholding in MEI diluted because of capital raisings - which more than disappointingly appears to be the sad road NRT management is preparing shareholders for. He thinks MEI will have no interest in looking for anything other than anti-cancer activities. Seems a reasonable way to prevent NRT's most promising asset slipping through our fingers and provide shareholders with a chance to recover their investment sometime down the road. Why didn't NRT management provide shareholders with some encouragement at the AGM that arrangements such as this were being pursued?
I note that Dr Kelly see's value in the glucan technology that NRT will retain with further investment.
Is anyone here holding on for a favourable deal to be done?