Thanks. This video was from 2011, about a year before I was invested in the company. I still believe the company's focus has changed to partner later, if at all, rather than early, and I believe this change was brought about as more experienced advisors were brought into the company. Over the past year, we've heard very little about partnering with big pharma, and Gerald has mentioned numerous times they feel they can increase the value of the assets before considering a partnership. The primary driver for partnering was capital, and with enough funding to last until 2016 there has been less interest in partnering as was the strategy early on.

I agree that these statements early on might have raised investor expectations, but I think it's clear at this point the strategy has shifted. I am not a subscriber of the rationale that because we haven't partnered there isn't any big pharma interest. It's possible, I suppose, but Gerald has stated in conference calls that there pharma interest, so I'll go with that over speculation of no interest.

Myself and some others on the board have suggested that with the continued talk of a diagnostics division spin-off, a partner at this point for our diagnostics might complicate the spin-off, or perhaps the partnership will be part of the spin-off. We won't really know how it will be structured until it is announced, but I expect shareholders will see some pretty great return on their investment when it happens. There was a Forbes article posted a couple of months back that described the spin-off as the best way to achieve maximum shareholder value, much more so than a partnership. That's clearly where the company's focus is now for our diagnostic assets.