It appears that the license agreement with Abbott does not delay or exclude other possible license agreements. On page 5 of the July 8, 2005 Research Notes it states that "the company plans to license or joint venture the Histo-RECAF technology to third parties. To that end, it is currently in discussions with potential partners/licensees. Management hopes to enter into a license arrangement by the end of 2005."
So we know that last July BOCX was in discussions to license the Histo-RECAF technology, and also that no deal occurred during 2005 as BOCX had hoped. Missing that timeline is not a concern to me. It is difficult for small biotech's to accomplish things when they hope to, especially when third parties are involved. In the October 6, 2005 update it also mentions that "...major biopharma companies invariably do their own technical due diligence and do not rely significantly upon other data."
What I keep coming back to is that Abbott should continue to be a player in any future deals. In 2004 Abbott was number two in clinical diagnostic revenue. My guess is that Abbott wouldn't mind being number one. If the RECAF technology works as good as BOCX says it does, Abbott will want it under their roof. Possibly all of it. And it that happens, the up front money next time will not be 200K. Therein also lies the beauty of how BOCX has done their first licensing deal. BOCX management has given Abbott a tidbit. There has been sufficient time for Abbott to know enough about the reliability of the sensitivity and specificity of the RECAF technology they licensed to be very (extremely?) interested in an exclusive agreement. The product development process, for what Abbott has a semi-exclusive right to implement, should be well on its way at this time. The October 6, 2005 Biocurex Update stated, in regard to the Abbott license, "In the most general terms, we are very pleased with the way things are moving along." That was over four months ago. kag
