Your Question:What rights Biota has to publicise "Relenza"...

Your Question:
What rights Biota has to publicise "Relenza" independently of GSK?
What right does Biota have to access (and publication) of sales/delivery/production figures other than at the end of each quarter?

Why would BTA be restrained from publicising Relenza , sales and or production information. When the lawsuit was ongoing, in ASX announcements, Peter Cook speculated on Relenza sales and production capacity.

HOWEVER, I am not advocating BTA burning shareholders fund marketing Relenza. Marketing Relenza with best effort is GSK’s contractual responsibility to BTA. Therefore BTA should be demanding this from GSK.

Due to the good efforts of HC posters, we read the “good news” (Production capacity, government orders, extended patents, etceteras) from the internet before the incompetent BTA management.

Didn’t the idiot Peter Cook told shareholders, his cooked settlement had “normalised the GSK relationship”? A licensee would normally keep the licensor informed.
Read this post for more details: http://www.hotcopper.com.au/post_single.asp?fid=1&tid=982315&msgid=5471260

Your Question: Is it just a master/servant relationship?
A licensee-licensor relationship is one of mutual respect and co-operation. The GSK-BTA relationship looks more like a master-gimp relationship. If not what could possibly be in his rear end when Peter Cook to praise GSK’s pathetic response to the swine-flu?

Your questions: Is Biota interested in positive publicity? eg IV treatment of critically ill patients etc etc. Should they employ a media person?

BTA management and in particular Peter Cook appeared only interested to talk down the company prospects. No, I am not advocating BTA ramp up the prospects – just report sales, orders, production capacity, extension of patents, etc in a neutral manner and in a timely manner as required by law.

Your question: Do they monitor the media - including HotCopper who effectively provide a free monitoring service?

I believe BTA management do read HC and HC posters emailed BTA these postings. As for Peter Cook, the Idiot slept (when GSK broadcasted and posted Relenza sales results) and went on to misinform the ASX wrong sales figures and when correcting his error blamed GSK for revising the results. Need I say more?

Gilead sued Roche for not marketing Tamiflu and settled for increased royalties and a fully committed Roche. BTA sued GSK with GSK offering to settle for $100m but the idiot Peter Cook refused the offer and then after burning $30m legal costs settled for $20m! The cooked settlement may have prevented BTA from further suing GSK for the current pathetic GSK performance.