RE:time for actionFirst, I understand the frustration that the people on the this board is feeling, as I am equally frustrated with the TSO3 stock performance in 2017. But we have to ask ourselves what could have been done differently, keeping in mind that hindsight is 20/20, before asking for a complete overhaul of the management and Board.
We must remember TSO3 is a small cap Canadian company with no commercial capability previously (now they have some presence, but only adequate in a supporting role), and they have to rely on its marketing partner to do the heavy lifting in pushing the product. TSO3's primary responsibility is in the R&D and regulatory front.
With that in mind, then there is 2 pertinent questions in judging RR's tenure:
1) Did he choose the wrong partner (i.e.: Getinge)? We all know Getinge had been disorganized from its own restructuring and other issues, and they have dropped the ball in the commercial push of VP4. But a lot of that is hindsight. Given what we knew 3 years ago, what are the other viable alternatives? The 3M bridge was burnt, and 3M also didn't do its part which lead to the dissolution of the deal. JNJ and Steris are the other obvious alternatives, but they already have dominating marketing share at the time, and might be not as interested. I am sure RR would have entertain their offers if they were presented. I must say Getinge represented a decent partnership choice at the time. Let's be honest, guys--how many of you thought the Getinge partership was decent at the time of signing?
2) Did RR dropped the ball in garnering varioius regulatory approvals? Yes, the road was long and torteous at times, especially during the 125L days when the ozone technology has not been perfected (it was great killing bugs, but it is also "destroying" equipment literally). With the VP4, RR finally has a great technology/product on hand, and the team then went on to garner unprecedented approvals from the FDA--different code, long complex scope claim, and the upcoming duo claims. We must remember the likes of JNJ and Steris have a lot more resources on hand, and they are nowhere close to garnering these approvals. So even though the journey was not perfect, it did get to where it supposed to in a best case scenario for TSO3 (assuming we get the duo claim soon while others are nowhere close).
Finally, did RR make a strategic error by partnering, vs. going-alone in the VP4 US launch? We all know it takes considerable resources (sales & marketing, technical support, maintenance) to launch VP4 in the US, and TSO3 will need to raise a lot of capital to do so on a standalone basis. While I can't speak for others, I will be deeply troubled by a go-alone strategy 2-3 years ago (when Getinge was signed) because of the inevitable dilution and the fact that VP4 did not have big product differentiation yet (no complex or duo scope approval yet at the time). Even if TSO3 can pull this off, US hospitals will likely doubt the longevity of a small cap Canadian company that is stretched financially, which is a critical factor to consider when they are buying a piece of equipment that will last them a decade.
With the above analysis, I stand by my view that RR did an admirable job during his TSO3 tenure so far, and he has the competencies and qualities that TSO3 needs at this stage of development. If the shareholders/Board decides that TSO3 should go alone in its US launch, then i will have to re-evaluate as the emphasis on operational (supply chain) and marketing expertise would be much more important then, vs. the current partnership/support role TSO3 is playing.
Please be patient, as the TSO3 story will play out (one way or the other) in 2018, imo.
Have a Happy New Year everyone...