well its a deal, page-56

Nice to see you drop by CMK, not a complete surprise I might add as we had some very interesting news today !


I reread the paragraph in question you were referring to several times with the same question marks as yours.
My conclusion of how to interpret this sentence is that the whole emphasis on " new " is regarding the strategic alliance.
OBJ did not have such a relationship with any of the negotiating partners to this point. Therefore the stratetic alliance as a form of relationship is entirely new, not necessarily meaning that the partner with whom this alliance is about to be formed is a new one.
I would concentrate on the word " addition " , meaning that this particular relationship is an add on to the already existing.

In my personal opinion, the FMCG is further masking its tracks, adding to already tight confidentiality clauses.
This does not surprise as the confirmation of the alliance deal would make the naming of the company compulsary and the FMCG will be out in the open, revealing their intentions to their peers.


The FMCG had started to test one particular drug of theirs in 08, created a letter of intent early this year.
It would only be the next logical step to offer a strategic alliance when consumer testings look favourable.
Its just too much a step by step procedure to assume that we have an entirely new player with us.
This new player would have to go through all those stages of research and testing themselves to come to such favourable outcomes as none of the testing companies to date involved would share their findings, naturally.

My conclusions are that this FMCG is indeed the company stated in the ann a month ago under the pharmaceutical sector, which has a multi billion dollar drug in consumer acceptance testing.
It is, again in my opinion, also the company which ordered OBJ to create the FIM application.


If we stay with my speculated case of RB being this FMCG, they would test Buprenorphine, for instance, as the multi billion dollar drug within their pharmaceutical division and other products with the FIM technology in their personal healthcare division.


There is admittedly speculation in the way I connect the dots here but this reflects my observation over the past years.

Many posters complain about nebulous wordings and lack of concrete numbers. I would like to refer to many other biotech companies who published similar anns prior to their break through deal. It is part of the very competitive industry to tiptoe between the need of informing the shareholders and the necessity to submit to restrictions of confidentiality.

Unlike the mining industry which is run by numbers, biotech is made accessable to the investor through research, academic peer activity, knowledge of regulatory hurdles and testing cycles and the ability to connect the dots in the anns to the public.