Post by
mercedesman on Mar 27, 2023 4:13pm
MM's missing take...
Annual update was neutral IMHO. Nothing new & tangible. Nothing terrible. Nothing unexpected. SP seems to agree.
Initiatives to Increase Tigris Enrolment:
New sites? Not excited. Show me that changing up the sites again is going to make a difference. Extra sites? Yawn. Heard it before many times. Maybe it will impact, but sh'ers are now saying "show me"
New CRO – ok maybe something that needed shaking up. Let’s see what happens going forward. What took us so long? Was this not apparent last year?
In-person Investigator meeting? Ok like this. ...I’ve said for awhile (to people that matter) that this is what is needed, as well as more “boots on the ground” as some people describe it. People literally phone it in on Zoom.
PMX media/Video? Great…but CRC’s/staff shouldn’t need this to be motivated. Perhaps it will have some impact on patients and their families, so worth a try (remember that once FDA approved, PMX becomes the std of care – so no long song an dance needs to be sold to Sepsis patients and their families).
If nothing starts to happen over the next Qtr or by AGM, then I would be fully behind a Mgt.shake-up. More incentives are not justified that I can see. It comes across as rewarding non-to-mediocre- performance. Replacing the CRO and a now close to 3/4 year distance from Covid-19 has pretty much eliminated all future excuses to getting this confirmatory Trial finished.
Other:
i-Dialco.
I am not as negative as others on this. Obviously, the steps & time to completion have increased. Likely reasons: it’s more than just a 30 person Study that is required to bring in a new HHD product. There are peripheral (e.g tubing) approval issues, insurance issues, legacy HP equipment (Prism-X) approvals, new JV’s being formed with big players that have their own timelines, liability concerns to work out, etc. Two players own 80% of the dialysis clinic business – it’s all about when they are ready to hit the go button…not when Spectral or Infomed is (like it or not, the timelines of customers and potential future buyers, are more important than the supplier)
Secondly, I don’t see them as having given up 20% to Infomed for nothing. 1. Infomed contributed all hardware, software and certain other intellectual property to further develop the SAMI and DIMI platforms. Spectral now owns a piece of that vs just some Distro rights. 2. Spectral now has a zero-cost license to the technology, granted by Infomed to the Joint Venture vs a finite distribution contract with minimums. 3. Infomed has agreed to fund all future development of the i-Dialco business, including working capital and commercialization costs, as well as planned development activities. What will that cost? $ 10M?, $ 25M?, $ 50M, more? How would Spectral have funded these costs? I would agree that investors (including myself) were misinformed and or overly optimistic about what it will take to bring i-Dialco products to commercialization, and the timelines involved. Blame whom you must for this.
Eden Study up to 42 patients. Euphas 2 still going strong. Very stoked about this. This is where the potential future revenue starts to multiply (label expansion are the code words to watch for)...The more evidence gathered, likely the wider the usage, and the higher the future cash flows become, and the higher the valuation (to the ultimate buyer) based on discounted future cash flows.
Impact of the NR on Long-Term Valuation IMHO? None...insufficeint quantification data provided.
Timelines? Insufficeint quantification data given.
Lengthened timelines well into 2024? Perhaps, but combined with higher discounted future cash flows (Eden?, increasing need, potential Covid-19 therapy, more cartridges per patient, etc.), I still say that with all the facts, the net effect is more likely to be positive to today's "true underlying" valuation, than negative.
MM
Comment by
jdunlop on Mar 27, 2023 9:13pm
Hmmmmmm , tooooooo many m, s here.
Comment by
jdunlop on Mar 27, 2023 9:14pm
Hmmmmmm , tooooooo many m, s here.