Agree with your points in general. To be clear, t

Agree with your points in general. To be clear, the $ figures I mentioned were from finesand referencing an example of another company, and she couldn’t be bothered to break out how much of that went to developing the other company’s pipeline instead of a sales team! That was the defining moment when I lost all respect for her posts, or abilities as an analyst. I personally think that even the low end of that range is exorbitant for developing a sales and marketing team. As others have mentioned, the majority of a sales force tends to work largely on commission. Bring in a couple of high-grade folks to run the show, and building a sales force just shouldn’t be that expensive. Distribution is another thing altogether, and I believe the company should outsource that.

To sum it up, if we get anything close to the up-front cash we believe that we could reasonably expect for either the test or HIV, I’ve seen nothing to suggest that the cost of building a sales force would be a stretch at all. We’ll see though. For the right price and royalty split, I’d probably prefer that they partner up with a big boy. It would speed things up and remove uncertainty, which would be good for short term valuations.

After all, I’m not trying to work the rest of my life...