Schiff issueThis is certainly an interesting development. The silence coming out of NTB over the last three months is mind-numbing.
So in the absense of any communication from the company, we can debate it ourselves:
1) $1M is an odd amount for a lawsuit claim. Is it not a common strategy to vastly inflate damages and then settle for much less? The $1M claim seems to imply only nominal actual damages are on the table. Is that all that Schiff attributed to the NTB relationship? In reading Schiff's recent profit release, in the footnotes about forward looking statements, they reference ongoing risks to all product supplies and the limited supply of krill oil (further highlighting the supply constraints in this segment of the industry, but also the competitive advantage NTB could have if they ever get off the snide on the production capacity.
2) Is the claim relating to non-delivery of product? Does this explain the empty shelves? Would this not be resolved going forward with the production capacity increase?
3) What does the new Bayer relationship have to do with the dispute? If Bayer truly is "commercializing" NTB's products - did that pose an inherent conflict with the Schiff deal??
I can't believe Cleland (whose reputation and 8 million shares are on the line) is tolerating this absolute lack of communication. And in the absense of communication, you can't help but question credibility and competence.