gotta love this stock, page-9

Hi Yokka - they need sales - quite right, and they have them. How many times does this need to be said? They sign a multi-year deal multi-million dollar deal and instead of people accepting this, all they get is criticism that quantities and revenues can't be enumerated precisely. But how can they? Revenues will be dependent on units ordered. Seems fairly straight forward to me. There is a minimum purchase amount and a maximum. Revenues will fall somewhere in-between, if not the maximum which seems more likely as the additional geographic areas are included in the initial agreement. Again, that's just for one geographic area, with twelve geographic more to come. Plus exclusivity fees still under negotiation.

In light of this, and with the second line Unifill to be installed and operational by second half next year, and production/sales forecast to ramp up from early 2013, I have no idea why the company continues to be punished when it continues to hit milestones and is now selling product, but such is life. Will this trading activity continue forever? No. How can it?

For what it's worth, (and apparently these days it's not worth much, LOL!), my opinion on what has happened over the past year or two, is "simply" this: As the company developed its core technology, the more the market for basic prefills and more specialised injectable devices changed. Perhaps more importantly, the physical make-up of the drugs at a molecular level has evolved dramatically and become more complex in the past few years.

For example, could Unilife have reasonably foreseen two years ago that in response to a specific request from a pharma client, they would now be developing a device for intra-occular injection? Would this have been possible without having first developed the core Unifill technology? Of course not. Should they ignore this opportunity? Of course not. If they did, I suggest they would be derelict in their duty to shareholders.

So Unilife finds itself in a position where its broad technology is increasingly sought-after, but where each device must be individually tailored to suit the needs of each individual the client pharma dependent on what type of drug is to be used in it, all this in a rapidly evolving market. All of which, unfortunately, takes time.

The speed and direction of the market evolution is not something the company can control - all they can do is respond to it, which is what they are doing.

Ask yourself this - where would Unilife be if they had not spent the time and money developing the Auto-Infusers, and all they had was Unifill? So now we have a company with a core product that the market wants, but which must be tailored to suit their individual needs. I think that's an enviable position to be in, and far preferable to the alternative - a one-trick pony trying to compete in a highly commoditised market controlled by BD.

As an aside, the mention of Sanofi came in the first question, and concerned Alan providing some guidance for 2013, including on that deal. He declined to do so, quite abruptly, IMO. Again, how could he do otherwise? It doesn't mean the deal isn't going to happen, it just means that he cannot pre-empt what is currently under negotiation.

Despite what many appear to think about me, I would not bull anyone on this thread, and I can confidently say nor Alan would bull me. People can take that as they wish. I'll stand with Rusty in the trenches any day!