Fink,

I second Chilbear's welcome to you to this board and his comments on CGNH. You are following a wise path to ignore the posts of self-serving individuals as regards CGNH.

In my experience execution of Material Transfer Agreements (MTA) are not reportable events. CGNH apparently announced them to signal to shareholders and the market at large that they are seeking to provide their proprietary beads to all vendors in the IVD space. This is good news if CGNH's silver-coated paramagnetic beads are to become the industry standard.

MTAs are typically very restrictive and usually tied to an explicit research development plan with ownership of any intellectual property resulting from such a development plan clearly defined. Additionally, the MTA will include restrictive covenants on the use and disclosure of the confidential information to third parties, to include disclosing the existence and terms of the MTA.

I share you frustration that CGNH has yet to announce the results of the head-to-head study and Merck's study with their current customers. I am also bothered by the limited R&D spend in Q4 ($172k) to advance their two programs. But I remain optimistic about the commercial prospects for the paramagnetic beads, the POC analyzer and their proprietary cartridges.

Ante