My only point is there are many benefits too having there own facility. it seemed to be good money spent, I think it was around 100,000.? not that much in the scope of things. (did they buy the building?) I suppose there where a few ways they could have done this but no matter how it was done the perceptions will be the same,, if the product becomes a success any choice was OK, , if no one ever starts using it any choice was wrong.
<<a year and a half later making an excuse..."we have minimal sales because we need FDA approval">>
That's not an excuse, that seems like information.
They spent how much to build a production facility to qualify to apply for a grant worth how much? I submit the prudent choice is to sub out production, when sales are little more than a wish you anticipate if and when you receive fda approval.
Did nanologix get that grant and how much?
What is this BS about not including capital costs for the plant? A responsible manager will take capital costs into account and one that doesn't is one to run from.
Mo: A going company also is careful not to partner with a company that has yet to lean good fiscal management. While you need to demonstrate the ability to manufacture product and a facility needs to pass regulatory inspection, why would a prudent manager spend all that money when they were so far from production? It is much more cost effetive to job out early production runs to approved manufacturers and then risk capital on developing one's own facilities, unless you are more interested in bling.
Bringing up that stuff makes me wonder why this was posted to the board, it sure sounds like someone didn't know what was needed for significant revenues back in 2008, doesn't sound like someone who's going bring out the full potential of this "World dominating" technology.IMO
<<Thanks for the thoughts on the recent news. I can provide some
information on what we think will happen soon:
We believe that we will have significant revenue by year end. The
sales just for one day of testing for a major lab can be thousands of
Money received in the near term will go for BNC/BNP production and
sales, with bioreactor R&D following. We are a business--- if our
scientists suddenly came up with a formula to produce the best-tasting
chocolate in the world, we would be selling chocolate before anything
else, as revenue is what we owe to the shareholders, not just practice
in conducting R&D.>>
Commish my point is the FDA important idea for sells wasn't talked about until recently( this year). The first step to even getting there appears to not have started until September 2009, why not sooner ? Didn't the CEO take over in 2007, see what I'm saying ? And like I said not til this year was it now talked about being so important to sales. I believe they didnt know about the necessary steps to getting huge sells until sometime in the year 2009. That lag is what I like to hear explained.
Commish, what I see others don't look at dates and think.
How about this one..
<<NanoLogix Inc. and University of Texas Medical Center Shortening Wait Times For Group-B Streptococcus Lab Tests, With Potential Market of 4.3 Million Tests A Year
Early Results Show NanoLogix BNF Technology Detects Group-B Strep At Least 12 Times Faster
HUBBARD, Ohio, May 18, 2010 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- NanoLogix, Inc. (Pink Sheets: NNLX) announced today the application of its BNF technology by the University of Texas-Texas Medical Center in controlled testing for the bacteria Group B Streptococcus (GBS) in pregnant women. Early results show NanoLogix BNF technology detects GBS in roughly two to six hours, as opposed to traditional Petri culture methods, which can take 72 hours or longer. Texas Medical Center physicians see the high-speed diagnostic capabilities of the NanoLogix technology as a key to faster detection of GBS in late term pregnancies and a reduction in the over use of antibiotics as an precautionary measure.
The Center for Disease Control (CDC) recommends all pregnant women be tested for GBS, amounting to roughly 4.3 million tests each year annually in the U.S. CDC guidelines recommend physicians test pregnant women for GBS in the final weeks of their term. Roughly 30 percent of reproductive-age women carry GBS. If mothers carrying GBS deliver before they are treated, the lives of newborns can be seriously endangered. The long wait times of traditional Petri culture technology (72 hours) puts infants at risk of being delivered before results come back. This increases the use of antibiotics, as a precautionary measure.
Physicians and staff at the University of Texas - Texas Medical Center in Houston began to experiment with obstetrics applications for NanoLogix BNF technology in September 2009. This week Medical Center personnel are undertaking work to determine the smallest amount of Group B Streptococcus (GBS) identifiable and the shortest test time achievable through the use of NanoLogix BNF technology.>>
Great news about this but what about that last part ! September 2009 it sounds the first step to getting us on the road to FDA submitting and hopeful approval, question is why it take so long to get there, was the CEO around way before this and didn't get the ball rolling sooner ? Another question did anyone here hear about needing FDA approval at that 2009 shareholder meeting when people here claim orders where in the 1000s with big name companies ? Now FDA approval is important without them sales are minimal ? Did anyone hear needing FDA approval being so important before this year ? This is one very interesting company.
hannibailec, here is a dinner mention.Read some of Warfield posts from a year ago.
Results on Cholera ? Where is those on the website ? EPA deadline ?