RE:RE:RE:RE:Competition@Aimee: this time the VP4 is an expensive washing machine rather than a fancy dishwasher??
10 Years too late?
- Absolutely not, as superbugs was not such a big issue back then. Like RR said during the RBC conference, endoscopes related infections had been going on for a long term, but historically the doctor just give his/her patient some antibiotics and it went away--so it is not a problem. Not until these superbugs start to come up, and we don't have any antibioitcs that can kill it.
- ECRI ranks "endoscope reprocessing failures" number 2 in its "Top 10 Health Technology Hazards for 2018"--so this problem is current and real, and the medical need is high
- I do wish we have this duo claim 3yrs earlier though, when FDA convened an advisory panel on duodenoscope reprocessing. The panel recommended reclassifying the Spaulding classification and moving duos from HLD to sterilization. However, it acknowledged there was no technology that can do that at the time, so it recommended a host of other "best practices" in the time being. Of course we all know our VP4 has the FDA approval to do the job now.
Disposable Endoscopes:
- For people who went through business schools, I am sure they all learned about Porter's 5 forces model. Substitution is a risk factor that needs to be assessed in any investment, and disposable endoscopes could be a threat to TSO3, until we examine further into the matter
- Has anyone ever tried these disposable endoscopes? I have, and I would say they have inferior images. More important, they don't have the maneuverability of the traditional endoscopes. They might be ok to do a routine straight sigmoidoscopy or even a simple colonoscopy, but good luck trying to guide them through bile ducts, etc, which is what duodenoscopes are used for
- Maybe technology advances to the point over the next 10yrs where we can make functionally equivalent disposable endoscopes. But how about costs? Higher functionality and maneuverability will cost more money. We must remember getting rid of medical grade waste cost a lot of money also, and should be added to the overall bill for these disposables.
- On the flipside, I doubt many VP4s will be used solely for endoscopes (except some high volume, stand-alone GI clinic), as these VP4s can sterilize other medical equipment as well. Hello, we are in the age of minimally invasive procedures, which mean more delicate equipment with electricity/wires/chips that will need low temperature sterilization (e.g.: robotic surgical arms--another selling point for the VP4). These are not towels and stuff, like you infer
- Finally, think about how these surgeons/GI docs get trained. If they are trained on traditional endoscopes, it will take a lot to move them over to disposable ones. What are the advantages of disposable endosopes again? Sterile and cost effective. With the VP4, we can have a sterile scope for every procedure at a cost lower than these disposables. CASE CLOSED. We just need to get the word out on our VP4.
Finally, I would like to rant a bit here. I would imagine most people here are interested in the TSO3 story, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered to look through all the threads (i.e.: just avoided the stock altogether). But somehow, I see several people who consistently hold a STRONG negative view on the company, and they keep throwing darts at various things that could go wrong or that should be done better. It is normal to worry and think about what can go wrong with your investments, but the level of conviction on these negative views seem very high from the tone of their posts. Shorts trying to spread fear?
Food for thought anyway...