Hi @pubenvelope - it's a great question.

Yes, it is a HOLD for me, because I already have as large a position in RL as I want (c. 4%). If I didn't hold or had a smaller position, then it would be a BUY for me.

Whenver I express a BUY/HOLD/SELL decision, it is always in relation to my Real LIfe (RL) ASX portfolio. This is important to understand because anything I write here is simply my notes about my portfolio. It is never advice for anyone else, because I am not qualified to give it, and this is not a platform to do that.

Secondly, while everything I hold on SM I also hold in RL, the converse is not true. There are companies I hold in RL that I do not hold on SM. These are usually larger, more well establised companies. At the moment these are (in weight order): RMD, WTC, XRO, TNE, BRG. (I always list these on my SM Profile, and I update the list monthly - it doesn't change that much!) As a result, my SM position sizes are often significantly larger than my RL ones.

Coming back to $BOT: I continue to hold a much more bullish view than the market. That said, I totally understand why the market has a more cautious view. It is very early days for SOFDRA in the US, and no-one knows how any of the following questions are going to play out over the next 6 months to 18 months:

• Given the promising start, how far into the prescriber base will $BOT penetrate?
• How often on average will each prescriber write a script?
• How will adherence evolve after the intial months? (It is reportedly holding up well for the majority who are on the autorefill program)
• How many reimbursed patients on the auto-refill will come back for a new script after 12 months? (This is a huge value-driver)
• How does GTN evolve? (Actually, I am less concerned about this now, even though I over-estimated it initially, and my error was a significant component of my reducing valuation.)

The 4C and the webinar discussion have eased my concerns about costs and sales & marketing, for now. I've modelled all the above questions, history-matchd to the first 6 months, and have found that you can get a very wide range of valuations. No-one can know more at this stage I'd assert. The uncertainty is unresovable.

I've done a bunch more modelling since the 4C. It doesn't change the message in my Valuation Straw from last week (other than, I have confirmed my suspicion that I was being a bit conservative in the scenarios I presented.)

I remain at least 90% confident that this business is worth more and $0.20, and I expect it is worth more than $0.35 ... and potentially a LOT more.

So, I view it as having a risk-reward profile I am very happy to have in my portfolio.

(Note: It is not uncommon for early stage, first product, pharma companies to suffer a significant share price "pull back" of disillusionment after early sales reports. So, today's $0.15 SP doesn't bother me at all. Personally, I feel very comfortable with where the business is, and my level of understanding of the risk and potential reward.)

"Is the timeline for reps in the field more the timing to hire all and deploy them? Surely they don't need 1-2 months training.."

Yes, @Schwerms - and to make reporting simple. "We achieved X sales with Y reps."

It also depends how experienced the reps are. The first 27 were industry veterans, so maybe they are now building a more balanced workforce. In that case, you might allow more time for newbies to be trained and shadow the high performers.