Sierra,
I have to say that your logic defies what was presented in the update. You quoted the first sentence about China, voicing your concerns about what could happen there.
How about the second sentence, "China and Intellectual property rights have an interesting and varied history so we hope to find a large entity in China with the vision to recognize, acquire, and protect the granted China patent rights."
That indicates that the company is aware of the China IP situation that's been featured in articles in the Wall Street Journal, Barron's, NYT, Fortune, Forbes, LA Times, Washington Post, London Times, etc. for decades and hopes that a legitimate business in China will buy the patent and behave as an international business should by respecting the IP rights they've purchased. After all, there must be a reason for acquiring a patent in China other than just to allow it to be pirated.
As for a miracle for the NSF, have you actually clicked on the link to the NSF Seed funding site and read the description of what the NSF is looking for? I have and it appears that they fund 100+ ventures per year with a million and a half dollars per each. I've looked at the N-Assay in depth and it looks to be a great fit for what the NSF wants. I'm very intrigued by the statement on the "screening pre-test" development. That would mean a double revenue test where the pre-test obviously would be used to detect the simple presence of a bacteria and the N-Assay would be the follow-on in-depth diagnostic to determine severity of infection and the antibiotic resistance, something you would not achieve through the screening pre-test. It's possible to envision 3-5 pre-tests sold for every N-Assay used depending on testing protocol. That equates to lots more revenue and I'd bet an acquisition from what you consider the "big boys" ( although that's a non-PC term, and should be the "mature adults" now).
As for the rest of your commentary, if NanoLogix is selling product why in the world would they be "toast and gone" by the end of 2018 because they haven't met some milestone that you and Elsie and Kraztkat have set. Gone from your portfolio is more like it.
Get real.
Scott
I have to say that your logic defies what was presented in the update. You quoted the first sentence about China, voicing your concerns about what could happen there.
How about the second sentence, "China and Intellectual property rights have an interesting and varied history so we hope to find a large entity in China with the vision to recognize, acquire, and protect the granted China patent rights."
That indicates that the company is aware of the China IP situation that's been featured in articles in the Wall Street Journal, Barron's, NYT, Fortune, Forbes, LA Times, Washington Post, London Times, etc. for decades and hopes that a legitimate business in China will buy the patent and behave as an international business should by respecting the IP rights they've purchased. After all, there must be a reason for acquiring a patent in China other than just to allow it to be pirated.
As for a miracle for the NSF, have you actually clicked on the link to the NSF Seed funding site and read the description of what the NSF is looking for? I have and it appears that they fund 100+ ventures per year with a million and a half dollars per each. I've looked at the N-Assay in depth and it looks to be a great fit for what the NSF wants. I'm very intrigued by the statement on the "screening pre-test" development. That would mean a double revenue test where the pre-test obviously would be used to detect the simple presence of a bacteria and the N-Assay would be the follow-on in-depth diagnostic to determine severity of infection and the antibiotic resistance, something you would not achieve through the screening pre-test. It's possible to envision 3-5 pre-tests sold for every N-Assay used depending on testing protocol. That equates to lots more revenue and I'd bet an acquisition from what you consider the "big boys" ( although that's a non-PC term, and should be the "mature adults" now).
As for the rest of your commentary, if NanoLogix is selling product why in the world would they be "toast and gone" by the end of 2018 because they haven't met some milestone that you and Elsie and Kraztkat have set. Gone from your portfolio is more like it.
Get real.
Scott
13
2
