Tooluck,I have quoted the 10% straight off the article from...

Tooluck,
I have quoted the 10% straight off the article from paragraph where it states

QUOTE: GlaxoSmithKline Plc's Relenza will account for about 10 percent of Japan's supplies and the government will also consider using drugs under development, Yoshinori Ito, a counselor at the Cabinet Office, told journalists in Tokyo today.

You interpret the statement to mean they will increase Relenza in the total stockpile to 10% rather than 10% of the new purchases. There is certainly some ambiguity in the statement. EVEN IF we were to interpret it favorably for BTA, Japan is the home front for Daiichi Sankyo, The Japanese youth suicides after using Tamiflu were widely publicised in the local media. Relenza do not have these advantages and influence anywhere else in the world, Despite these massive advantage, the 10% or 15% definitely contrast starkly to the 25% bubbly exuberated Taylor Collison's prediction.

As for Bioshare, the distortion of the cash assets and their mathematically challenged statements speak for themselves. By the way, I have used an optimistic 7% royalty. From memory (not very sure), it is 7.5% for Australia and 6.5% for the rest of the market.

The supposedly independent Bioshare report has the Peter Classic Hallmark similarities all over it. In my previous posts, I have posted on similar Peter Classic statements such as:
http://www.hotcopper.com.au/post_single.asp?fid=1&tid=742386&msgno=3304521#3304521