From April: OK; I need help with this one! They are not retailing the product because it is not yet available for OTC insurance benefits???
So, they are giving up income from customers who would buy the product even if not covered by insurance? That makes no sense. Let's take a conservative number. If only 25% of potential customers would buy without the insurance coverage, that's certainly better than zero income and zero product exposure.
Doesn't sound right to me, but I'm open to reasonable explanations.