Firstly the company has nothing on the go, nothing on the horizon so "cant" say anything...
Or
The company is bound by their biggest partner P & G, to only disclose what has been vetted by P & G.."
It looks like the first option might be the case. After all, the attempt to get performance shares at the last AGM was based on a target of only 10 cents, and that was only after a new product licence, and they gave themselves until 31 December 2018 to fulfil those two requirements. If they were confident, they'd have bought on market and participated more strongly in CRs.
I'd say that shareholders have overestimated this company for a long time. They keep wanting more info about supposed good news, but more importantly, bad news doesn't even get reported. Have another look at the recent Australian article:
"The company... had originally looked at vaccine work and drug delivery but Denison says the regulatory constraints for a little Australian company were too big. So OBJ changed tack and decided to move into the fast moving consumer goods market."
People here were banging on about vaccines way past that point because OBJ didn't inform the market. Then there was the bizarre GSK failure hidden in a 4c. Then there's this admission in the Australian article:
"The company has deliberately flown under the radar, according to its chairman, but Denison says it is now ready to tell its story. “We took a decision in 2008 to not promote the company until we had it validated by a big major,” he says."
Clearly, they thought the company's success was vulnerable, but people here were saying all the secrecy and poor communication was because the tech is so awesome. Now it has taken over two years since P&G signed on to see a pittance in revenue.
Surely the conclusion must be that the info that isn't being communicated is at least partly negative, and that shareholders have overestimated this company.
(20min delay)