gunnabeoneday, to get back to your excellent points which nearly got lost.
There are probably several reasons why large pharma's have not partnered with DNAP, different sets of reasons applying in different cases I would think. Candidate reasons have been discussed many times over the years and no doubt range from DNAP not wanting to give their technology away, and hence refusing lowball bids, to large pharma having a (mis)conception that it is not in their interests to segment the market for their products. The latter is probably a big factor, although we can see already that there will be pressure longer term for them to adopt pharmacogenomics, and several are already dipping their toes in the water (the people who run drug companies may be evil but they are not stupid). We do not know what discussions have taken place with third parties, or even whether deals have been struck and not yet anounced, and so can only speculate at this stage.
Other companies would typically not offer funding as such, but would rather look to acquire our technology. One probable reason that this has not happened is that any offer would again be in the lowball category. It is well known that big pharma tries to "steal" this sort of technology before acquiring it via a legitimate bid that is acceptable to shareholders of the company holding the intellectual property.
The option is indeed not applicable in the scenario that you mention.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
