Yes DebK that was me, Don's exact words were that he could have sold it (RVX) "that day" for $8B but because of the topline miss the EV was now $4B (9/30). To me it makes sense that BT status raises EV because, as long as things go as expected, the time to market decreases thereby increasing total potential patent protected cash flow. 

People have been discussing potential price for buying RVX. Doing some very basic math I can easily find support for Don's number plus call it another billion now for BT status, that would bring the number to $5B.  If one was to say that a purchase price was to be roughly 1x projected peak annual sales then using company numbers of $6-12,000 per patient per year (I'll use 6) to reach $5B Apabetalone only needs to find its way to 833,000 target patients, which is a fairly small percentage of the global target market within diabetics. Additionally, this market is projected to grow rapidly from it's already enormous size.  Further this is accounting for revenue generated by only one indication for Apabetalone and assigns no value for renal, CHF, HIV etc and assigns no value for other RVX IP.  

I believe from memory that the RVX Apabetalone patents are good until at least 2030.  Using the outlined math it is probably quite conservative to say that if approved Apabetalone could generate $30-$40B in revenues for a purchasing pharma and also provide that pharma with further huge potential upside with other Apabetalone indications and from other IP.  RVX could be the foundation of an epigenetics platform for a purchasing pharma.  Most CEOs would pay $5B for something that could generate $30+B in revenue, I think the biggest question now is when has Apabetalone been de-risked enough to pull the trigger.  I think BT status certainly takes us closer to that point.  JMO