I doubt if Hepalink could afford the US rights if BETOnMACE is a success. I also seriously doubt they are interested. My opinion is that when Hepalink bought the ROFR it was probably as insurance to protect themselves from RVX letting the license go cheaply and affecting the long term value of Hepalink’s investment. Remember two years ago RVX was cash starved and still had a long way to go to the finish line. Now we are much closer to the finish line, a lot more positive has come out since regarding the science and the share price is much higher. The insurance has probably served its purpose and I think the ROFR will likely just expire.

Hepalink seems to me a very well run company that is very good at manufacturing pharmaceutical grade products to a very high standard. I don’t know about China but in the rest of the world they have partnered with multiple big pharma to distribute what they manufacture. They don’t distribute it themselves. Why would they want to waste patent protected time and big money setting up required infrastructure when there are others who already do that very well? Perhaps if they could have gotten US licensing cheaply they might have been interested in manufacturing and partnering for distribution but I think the rights are now too expensive. Further I think, without paying license fees, their ownership in RVX and their own manufacturing track record might give them an inside track to manufacture Apabetalone for hire in NA and elsewhere given that if successful Apabetalone will be manufactured by them in China and their related territory.  I definitely could be wrong but personally, given Hepalink’s structure and core competencies, I have always thought that Hepalink’s strategy was probably to make out in a big way purely as an investor in RVX and then further make a lot of continuous cash flow servicing their existing home territory. JMO