Sigmund,
I believe that AccuMed only paid $4 million for its two-thirds share of Oncometrics in late 1996. Since it appears that AccuMed's main contribution to the NewCo is Oncometrics and its associated technologies in development (ie. AcCell-Savant), I believe the valuation is fair especially if you consider AccuMed has already siponed off some of the technology. In essence AccuMed has retained it current profit centers while sharing its risk in R&D with others!
You asked how does this lead to faster profitability? I believe the answer is fourfold. First they will now only recognize a portion of the costs associated with R&D and its 66% share of Oncometrics. Second, they expect products to be brought to market quicker. Third, it greatly extends international presence. Fourth, the products will be better integrated with other non-AccuMed systems.
As far as Sakura goes, when I tried to research the company it became apparent quickly that in the U.S. it is better known by its brand name products than its company name. (ie. Tissue-Tek, Cyto-Tex, VIP, Accu-Edge, Uni-Cassette Systems, Histo-Tek, and Cryomoid)
You made reference to Sakura's annual report. According to the press release Sakura is a privately held company. Don't expect to see an annual report on Sakura.
You also asked about the AccuMed's sales and support staff. I don't see any change in position here. The cross training of sales and support staff was for AccuMed's internal sales and support staff. They have clearly stated that they intended to continue to seek distribution channels outside the company through strategic agreements and partners. AccuMed has also stated that all future distribution channels would be non-exclusive as far an AccuMed's sales and support staff would be concerned. AccuMed's prospectus stated that the Company will be required to enter into additional distribution arrangements in order to achieve broad distribution of its products.
I certainly agree with your assessment that this is a major move by AccuMed.
Cisco |
