Elric, I find this problematic, to put it mildly. Have proposed the following to O'Hara? You obviously understand this a major problem, because you have raised it with O'Hara. He has not acted, so you have.
The fact another company has issue a press release falsely associating itself with OptiBiotix—especially touting the use of a product like LeanBiome without a formal agreement or endorsement—several repercussions could unfold, with potentially serious implications for OptiBiotix's reputation and strategic expansion, particularly into critical markets such as the USA.
Brand Dilution & Market Confusion
By co-opting OptiBiotix’s name and science, the unauthorised company effectively blurs the lines between genuine, clinically backed innovation and opportunistic marketing. Consumers, investors, and partners may be misled into believing there's a formal relationship where none exists. This not only undermines OptiBiotix's credibility but also reduces its ability to control the narrative around its products.
Erosion of Scientific Integrity
OptiBiotix has invested in rigorous clinical studies—a cornerstone of its IP value. If another entity makes unsubstantiated or misleading claims using this data out of context, it risks tarnishing the scientific credibility not just of the product in question but of the brand more broadly. If their interpretation or application is flawed, it reflects poorly back on OPTI, regardless of disassociation.
Legal & Commercial Repercussions
Public misrepresentation could be grounds for legal action—IP infringement, false endorsement, or defamation—but pursuing such claims can be time-consuming, costly, and potentially distracting at a pivotal moment of market entry. Meanwhile, the damage may already be done, especially if stakeholders perceive OPTI as vulnerable to such misappropriation. I seriously doubt OPTI have the funds to take the fight to the infringer.
Investors and potential partners scrutinise credibility meticulously. If it appears OPTI cannot control the use of its brand and research, that may raise red flags around governance and oversight. It risks scaring off high-calibre strategic partners who are wary of reputational risk by association.
Consumer Mistrust
If the product tied to the fake release underperforms or is associated with poor outcomes, consumers might erroneously attribute this to OPTI, potentially damaging brand trust and long-term customer loyalty.
Such a misrepresentation isn't just a nuisance; it's a reputational landmine. For a science-led firm like OPTI, whose value proposition is grounded in empirical credibility, IP integrity, and market trust, false association could seriously hinder its ability to scale and thrive—particularly in a regulatory and competitive environment like the USA.
Josh, I've reached out to SOH, TW, and Lean for Good to share my concerns. You’ve raised some excellent points, and I’d add another that PJ flagged to me: what happens if the inferior LeanBiome starts causing side effects for consumers? Even though it’s not OptiBiotix’s formulation, the reputational fallout could still land at their door. Food for thought.
Why would a Plc allow another company risk harming its reputation its been trying to culture for so many years. It makes no sense at all.
Given a drowning man would clutch at straws, then do we have a CEO who sees the (unofficial) use as free marketing?
Very risky. Shall we put it down as just one more bad decision? Or, OPTI hasn't the funds to go on the offensive?
👍
Elric, I find this problematic, to put it mildly. Have proposed the following to O'Hara? You obviously understand this a major problem, because you have raised it with O'Hara. He has not acted, so you have.
The fact another company has issue a press release falsely associating itself with OptiBiotix—especially touting the use of a product like LeanBiome without a formal agreement or endorsement—several repercussions could unfold, with potentially serious implications for OptiBiotix's reputation and strategic expansion, particularly into critical markets such as the USA.
Brand Dilution & Market Confusion
By co-opting OptiBiotix’s name and science, the unauthorised company effectively blurs the lines between genuine, clinically backed innovation and opportunistic marketing. Consumers, investors, and partners may be misled into believing there's a formal relationship where none exists. This not only undermines OptiBiotix's credibility but also reduces its ability to control the narrative around its products.
Erosion of Scientific Integrity
OptiBiotix has invested in rigorous clinical studies—a cornerstone of its IP value. If another entity makes unsubstantiated or misleading claims using this data out of context, it risks tarnishing the scientific credibility not just of the product in question but of the brand more broadly. If their interpretation or application is flawed, it reflects poorly back on OPTI, regardless of disassociation.
Legal & Commercial Repercussions
Public misrepresentation could be grounds for legal action—IP infringement, false endorsement, or defamation—but pursuing such claims can be time-consuming, costly, and potentially distracting at a pivotal moment of market entry. Meanwhile, the damage may already be done, especially if stakeholders perceive OPTI as vulnerable to such misappropriation. I seriously doubt OPTI have the funds to take the fight to the infringer.
Investors and potential partners scrutinise credibility meticulously. If it appears OPTI cannot control the use of its brand and research, that may raise red flags around governance and oversight. It risks scaring off high-calibre strategic partners who are wary of reputational risk by association.
Consumer Mistrust
If the product tied to the fake release underperforms or is associated with poor outcomes, consumers might erroneously attribute this to OPTI, potentially damaging brand trust and long-term customer loyalty.
Such a misrepresentation isn't just a nuisance; it's a reputational landmine. For a science-led firm like OPTI, whose value proposition is grounded in empirical credibility, IP integrity, and market trust, false association could seriously hinder its ability to scale and thrive—particularly in a regulatory and competitive environment like the USA.
Wow. You don't mess about.
Josh, I've reached out to SOH, TW, and Lean for Good to share my concerns. You’ve raised some excellent points, and I’d add another that PJ flagged to me: what happens if the inferior LeanBiome starts causing side effects for consumers? Even though it’s not OptiBiotix’s formulation, the reputational fallout could still land at their door. Food for thought.
SOH does need to act on the above, if only for clarification. I do wonder if he's lost the plot. (Hope not)