I did not mean to convey the impression that LFB would not pull their weight in the relationship. Rather, I would liked to have seen a deal structured with some milestone payments to help with GTC's future cash burn. I guess that would reflect a licensing agreement rather than a 50-50 partnership. Since GTC has not yet tested any product in the area, a partnership is more appropriate.
Are you aware of LFB entering into similar collaborative partnerships? What is the track record for LFB in collaborative agreements?
GTC will tie up some resources and will probably increase the cash burn, but the market for FVIIa should be lucrative for a low cost producer bringing a product to market. The question is to what extent will ATryn and revenue from other licensing agreements be able to sustain GTC in the future. What is your best guess as to when financing will be come an issue again (18 months or longer?).
Thanks for your thoughts. This is the type of vote that only time can provide answers to. I'm not terribly swayed by the BOD recommendation since collectively they hold relatively few shares and most of their percentage ownership is in the form of options. But I do believe management sees enough upside to warrant the risks inherent in the partnership.
I realize each of us need to reach our own conclusions and vote our shares accordingly.
Thanks for your thoughts
FL