bio, all CDMO's that compete in the arena of small molecules have 3 main arguments to approach the potential customers.
-> Long Term Stability (Capital, Exchange quoted, reference customers, etc)
-> The Lab technology (single use reactors, forward only chain, cold storage capacity, etc).
-> Pricing and Availability
So people sitting in multiple CDMO BoDs cannot impact daily business in wheeling in customers and pipelines. They could handicap CDMO by refusing to expand, block hiring, etc but they clearly didn't do that.
Stacy would have been a problem. She, if she would be in multiple CDMO's, could swing things because she is in the front-line of where a deal gets made.
Every of our competitors knows about the two first points above without needing a BoD member. Avid participates in events and advertises its lab technology, even consults in that area. But the pricing is between the CEO and his staff. The details of a deal will not be mentioned until it is signed and EVERY SINGLE person in that BoD that would be at two places where both are after a same deal would need to call for conflict in interest and leave the meeting.
Furthermore there are people in the BoD that are NOT in multiple CDMOs. They will fight for Avid if it would look that one of their peers is not. I think they ALL know who is in what other enterprise and such mixes are not unusual. Ref. CEO Google in BOD of Apple at the time.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
