Mark-
Thanks for the website pointer and the OraTest correction. OraScan is the name used in Canada. It's called OraScreen in Australia and the UK, and will, indeed, be called OraTest in the US.
I'm troubled by Hines' comments about the advantages of the BDTC acquisition. I don't know much about BDTC--no idea how big they are, available resources, etc,-but looking back to a press release on 2/1/96, following the deal with P&G, it seems we are now getting some serious spin-doctoring. Some excerpts:
"P&G is a marketing power in the dental and medical markets. P&G can accelerate broad national adoption of our product in a time frame that would be unimaginable if Zila were to market OraScan [sic] alone.
"Initially, Zila intended to market OraScan directly to health professionals in the US... but management became convinced that for the US, the magnitude of success was likely to be far greater through an alliance with P&G than if Zila handled the product entirely on its own.
"Mounting a comprehensive domestic marketing program will be an extremely costly undertaking, requiring substantially more resources than Zila could provide. Extraordinary finances and manpower are required for dual selling programs aimed at dentists and other medial professionals.
"With P&G, OraScan gains the benefits of a full-blown marketing drive; a seasoned, professional selling force; the instant credibility and recognition that attaches to the P&G name; a deep pocket to support an intensive advertising program and extensive professional liaison activities; and the economic efficiencies that accompany a multi-national selling program."
I guess I'm a concerned shareholder at this point. Is BDTC strong enough to achieve the same advantages? Do they offer advantages of their own? (P&G was more of a supermarket brand distributor interested in getting into the field of health care distribution. Perhaps, in this regard BDTC has advantages that even mighty P&G or a similar "mega" company couldn't offer.)
Anyone with more info, please help me out here.
Thanks much,
Ivan |
