That "link" that you refer to, DJ, gives further credence to two subtle comments made by our team. The first was the one made by Bec in the TF webinar and the second one was made by Steven in either the Firside Chat or the AGM (or both).
Bec happened to mention that TF allowed the use of "TF's" equivalent of CellPryme's younger phenotype cells in our the OmniCAR R&D which she described as being "close to our heart". We know from Bec's earlier research and publications on the Gibco CTS Rotea that TF as a sevice provider have collaborated with Bec (and vice versa). In fact, I just came across this which was published on their website only recently-
Could TF's younger phenotype cell technology by the work of Bec's... which only now is being fully optimised and developed for commercialisation??? Just a thought.
Steven made mention of the types of third parties currently involved with CellPryme. The first is "innovators" and the second is what he said he would best call "service providers". Then, of course, "business developments" was highlighted here by a poster as having possible significance to TF. And, yep, Stuart also stated that getting CellPryme involvement from those who are cell manufacturers is the way to go. I dare say that Bec has been instrumental in her collaborative research years with TF and could soon be paying off for PTX.
