Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
How low does pps go??
Sport Units,????????
It's an offer for sale of units?????? Whaaaaaa
Where does the dust settle, as a four year holder I look at the glass full
I'm no doctor but I have a keen eye with respect for award winning IP, a MIS robotics industry that's gonna explode by the billions, and a technology that makes an industry procedure quicker, cost effective, and provides the surgical ergonomic.
I'm buying but would like to know a little more about our current financial offerings....
Anyone guesstimate??
Gl20 guessed hight .20's anyone else Have a pulse or guess?????
On hold for 5 minutes and nothing but. Elevator music
Anyone know how to skip or speed up the three day window it takes to access your funds after a deposit with Scottrade??? Want to add Monday b4 announcement but won't have access to funds til Wednesday or Thursday....
Sounds like a Titan that's been in the game over 3 years now
Isn't Monday evening the call??
TITAN/JNJ/VERB/FLYROCKOFLY
Bancrupt with 10 million in the bank? Your nucking futs
Is it possible that question led to Hargrove's removal???????????
They didn't shut it down, no one else had the balls to ask any more questions... Hargrove gave a eloquent bs response and never really answered the question
66 stop gloating about your wealth it's fallacious
Rocko!! FlyBaby!! TITAN/VERB/VEGAS
Todd Pope is a Disgraced Degenerate please don't disgrace our shareholders with this POS
http://www.ximedica.com/index.php/about/detail/ximedica-recapitalizes-with-sv-life-sciences
Paul A. LaViolette. Mr. LaViolette is a Partner at SV LifeSciences. He joined SVLS in 2009 and has over 33 years of global medical technology management experience. Prior to joining SVLS, Mr. LaViolette was most recently Chief Operating Officer at Boston Scientific Corporation (“Boston Scientific”), an $8 billion medical device leader. During his 15 years at Boston Scientific, he served as COO, Group President, President-Cardiology and President-International. Mr. LaViolette integrated two dozen acquisitions and led extensive product development, operations and worldwide commercial organizations. Mr. LaViolette previously held marketing and general management positions at C.R. Bard, Inc., and various marketing roles at Kendall (now a part of Covidien plc). He currently serves on the boards of Baxano Surgical, Inc., Cardiofocus, Inc., CardioKinetix, Inc., Coridea NC2, Inc., CSA Medical Inc., DC Devices Inc., Direct Flow Medical, Inc., Thoratec Corporation, TransEnterix and ValenTx, Inc., all of which are privately-held, as well as the Medical Device Manufacturers Association. Mr. LaViolette received his B.A. in Psychology from Fairfield University and his MBA from Boston College.
Mr. LaViolette’s experience and attributes qualify him to serve as Chairman of our Board for several reasons. Mr. LaViolette’s vast medical technology operating experience and management makes him knowledgeable in the areas of product launches, new product development, clinical and regulatory affairs, quality systems, international sales and marketing, and acquisitions and integrations. His role as chairman of the board of directors of several companies provides him with the experience and skill set to be an effective leader of the Board.
Phillip Frost, M.D. Dr. Frost has served as the CEO and Chairman of OPKO since May 2007. Dr. Frost was named the Chairman of the Board of Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Limited (“Teva”) in March 2010 and had previously been Vice Chairman since January 2006 when Teva acquired IVAX. Dr. Frost had served as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of IVAX since 1987 until its acquisition by Teva. He was Chairman of the Department of Dermatology at Mt. Sinai Medical Center of Greater Miami, Miami Beach, Florida from 1972 to 1986. Dr. Frost was Chairman of the Board of Directors of Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from 1972 until the acquisition of Key Pharmaceuticals by Schering Plough Corporation in 1986. Dr. Frost was named Chairman of the Board of Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services Inc., an investment banking, asset management, and securities brokerage firm providing services through its principal operating subsidiary, Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc., in July 2006 and has been a director of Ladenburg Thalmann from 2001 until 2002 and again since 2004. Dr. Frost also serves as Chairman of the board of directors of PROLOR, a development stage biopharmaceutical company. He serves as a member of the Board of Trustees of the University of Miami and as a Trustee of each of the Miami Jewish Home for the Aged, and the Mount Sinai Medical Center. Dr. Frost is also a director of Castle Brands, Inc. (“Castle”), a developer and marketer of premium brand spirits. Dr. Frost previously served as a director for Continucare Corporation, Northrop Grumman Corp., Ideation Acquisition Corp., and as Governor and Co-Vice-Chairman of the American Stock Exchange. Dr. Frost’s experience in successfully founding several companies in the medical field and overseeing the development and commercialization of a multitude of pharmaceutical products, combined with his experience as a physician and chairman and/or chief executive officer of large pharmaceutical companies, makes him a valuable member of our Board.
Todd M. Pope. As president and chief executive officer for TransEnterix since September 2008, Mr. Pope has had primary responsibility for TransEnterix’s strategic vision and oversight of its organic growth. Mr. Pope has spent more than 20 years working in key leadership positions within the medical-device industry. Prior to joining TransEnterix, Mr. Pope served as worldwide president of Cordis, a multi-billion-dollar division within Johnson & Johnson’s medical-device business. He previously held a number of leadership positions within Johnson & Johnson and Boston Scientific. Mr. Pope received his bachelor’s degree from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and currently serves on the University’s Kenan-Flagler Board of Visitors, and Educational Foundation Executive Board. Mr. Pope’s history as president and chief executive officer of
I would puke if it's a partnership with trxc but all signs point to that possibility b/c of ximedica ownership
I get the naysayers that their is no way that Verb partners with Titan but I remember my boy John Hargrove a previous Ethicon exec along with his rock Fowler speak about the industry challenges and opportunities long before Scott H came into the picture; the similarities between both companies core objectives are in line for this fantasy to become the common shareholders reality....
A titan is an extremely important person. Albert Einstein was a titan in the world of science. The noun titan comes from Greek mythology, in which the Titans were a race of gods. Today, a titan is someone who is god-like, or powerful and influential in a certain field.
Old interview but great content for newbies
May 17, 2017 •
www.medicaldesignandoutsourcing.com/titan-medical-ceo-wants-game-robotic-surgery/
Titan Medical CEO Wants To Up The Game In Robotic Surgery: Here’s How
Titan Medical’s Comeback
Titan Medical – the young, upstart Canadian robotic surgery company – is making a comeback this year. Just today, the company announced the completion of initial formative human factors studies for its Sport single port robotic surgical system.
The Sport system boasts the ability for a variety of surgical instruments on snake-like arms to be deployed through a single 25 mm incision for a minimally invasive surgery. Surgeons get to work at a mobile, ergonomically designed workstation with a 3D high-definition endoscopic view inside the patient. Completing the human factors study was an important milestone under the leadership of Titan’s new CEO David McNally, who took over in January. McNally previously led Domain Surgical to a successful merger with OmniGuide Surgical. He succeeded interim chief John Barker, who had replaced John Hargrove in October 2016 after the company had to put the development of the Sport platform on hold amid a lackluster funding round. (Providence, R.I.–based Ximedica and Titan revived Sport development after Titan closed on a $7 million round later in October.)
Since McNally took over, there have been a number of other important developments at Toronto-based Titan:
In February, the company brought in senior biomedical engineering executive Perry Genova, Ph.D., to be its VP of research and development;
Titan in March closed on a $5 million funding round;
In April, the company brought in senior executive Curtis Jensen to be its VP of quality and regulatory affairs;
Titan in April ended talks with Chinese distributor Longtai Medical so that it could better focus on winning regulatory approval in the U.S. and Europe for the Sport system.
Interviewing The Titan
MDO recently caught up with McNally to ask him about Titan Medical’s goals, including the company’s need to raise $70 million for commercialization, and how McNally sees the company standing out in a surgical robotics market still dominated by Intuitive Surgical:
MDO: What are your major goals for the company?
McNally: At a high level, we’re focused on completing product development, which is well underway. Our plan is for the company to manage the product development process more closely than it has in the past. That began with the successful recruitment of a new vice president of research and development to head up our product development process … a measured move by the company to own the product development process more closely than it has in the past. We still rely on our contract development and manufacturing partners. But it’s very important for us to own the user requirements of the translation of those into our design requirements. From a product development perspective, I want to see us with fully functional advanced prototypes operating in live animal models this year – and with clarity on the regulatory pathway, preparing for FDA clearance and CE Mark, in order for us to be applying for both by the end of 2018, in anticipation of commercialization at selected sites in the U.S. and Europe in 2019. That’s also why we added an experienced regulatory executive to our staff early this year. The good news is that the feedback from surgeons that we have shown the system to, at trade shows last year in 2016, was very encouraging. We continue to engage our surgeon advisors for input on the design of the product … as we iteratively continue to improve the product, focusing on ergonomics, not just for the surgeon but for the entire hospital staff.
MDO: Not only are you competing against Intuitive Surgical and its da Vinci systems, but you have a host of other competitors including TransEnterix, which is betting on the haptics technology in its Senhance robot-assisted surgery platform. How does Titan Medical differentiate itself?
McNally: We welcome all the competitors to expand in the space. The way I look at it, the success of a number of competitors further validates the robotically assisted surgery marketplace. … TransEnterix has a respectable offering in their Senhance system, which is a multi-port system … multiple arms, multiple towers. We believe that our single incision approach can expand the addressable market with its simplicity and the opportunity for surgeons to have greater dexterity and perform more functions through a single incision. So, we actually look at our technology in some ways to be complimentary to the multi-port systems of Intuitive and TransEnterix.
MDO: Are you still looking at a price point for the Sport system that’s under $1 million?
McNally: We’re currently evaluating that further. We believe that the market can bear a range of price points, depending on the benefits of the technology that are delivered with savings to the price point that has been established in the marketplace to date … the $1.5 million to $2 million range. … With my 30 years in the business, I have the experience to note that it’s always easier to reduce prices than to raise prices. As a new company entering this space, it makes sense for us to do our homework on assessing the feature set and benefits of the technology against pricing – and to make sure that, most importantly, that we can justify our value proposition. That includes not only the capital equipment, the robot, but even more importantly, the consumables, the parts that are disposed of with each procedure or are disposed of after a limited number of uses. … So, we look very closely at the cost per procedure, as well as capital equipment cost, from the user perspective.
MDO: It sounds as though the idea strategically is that the Titan Medical Sport system will cost a few hundred thousand dollars less than a da Vinci system, will be smaller, easier to roll between surgical suites and overall a more flexible system – not taking up a whole surgical suite in a hospital?
McNally: Yes. To summarize, we believe that single-port surgery will have its place in surgical robotics, based on our own primary research with surgeons. We’re determined to produce the best single-port solution, providing unprecedented dexterity and an exceptional vision system. The surgeon, as well as fellows and residents, can see in 3 dimensions with outstanding ergonomics, so we believe that it will be most user friendly for surgeons to learn on our workstation and then perform surgery. Further, the compact nature of our single arm solution is expected to provide for faster turnover in the operating room. We intend to make it easier to set up and get ready for the next case. The mobility of Sport allows it to be moved within the operating room, and within a hospital facility or ambulatory surgery center. And it is a cost-effective solution in the manner that we are engineering the reusable and consumables components, so that it can be justified by the hospital administrators as a right-size solution for many of the hospitals on the smaller end of the range, as well as outpatient surgery centers. It provides an opportunity for robotics to be embraced by a part of the market that previously has not had the opportunity to engage with robotic systems, based on cost and complexity.
MDO: What kind of indications are you looking at for the Titan Medical Sport system?
McNally: General abdominal, urology and gynecology are the application areas that we believe are the best places to start, beginning with low-risk procedures. And then, we expect that surgeons will tell us where they would like to take it next. With experience, we expect adoption in more complex procedures, including oncology surgeries.
MDO: The capital raises you’re planning this year – how much do you need?
McNally: We expect to raise on the order of $70 million to take us through commercialization. And so, we’re working with our Canadian and U.S. investment bankers on strategy and execution to raise that amount. This opportunity is unique in that there is an unmet need in the marketplace. The market is significant in magnitude, and so, we want to make sure we do this right. We always try to think: different and better. And different alone, of course, doesn’t build a leading franchise. I marvel at some of the commercial examples we’ve seen in consumer products where companies have delivered such an incredible value proposition – like, for instance, Apple. And so, we should all be trying to delight our customers with solutions that empower them to do much more than they’ve been able to in the past. What’s very exciting about this surgical robotics opportunity is if we do this right, we have the opportunity to not only improve patient outcomes and delight surgeons but to also delight the operating room staff, which is so critical to successful outcomes in the operating room, as well as hospital administrators. So, we focus on every aspect of the business. It all ties back to delivering clinical benefits, but the ability to do so economically also allows more patients to enjoy the benefits of the improved repeatability and outcomes provided by surgical robots.
Would it be possible that McNally pulls a Todd Pope and has a preplanned sell order on the majority of his stock when TITAN gets FDA approval??? If so would it play out like the other company and kill pps momentum???
JMAC this is the magic bullet theory but holy moly this is fn big, should I take out a equity line against my duplex??? At 5% interest I have 50 k to play with, holy moly I wanna roll the dice, this is gonnnnnnnnna be Donald Trump HUUUUGEAAAhHHH!!!!
Jim I got an iPhone and I'm on the website where is description?????
If rocko's prediction comes to fruition this is a rocket to the moon
if Titan is verbs platform we will be richer beyond our wildest dreams
ROCKO......
JNJ has over a billion to spend in future acquisitions
Integra LifeSciences Holdings, a US-based surgical and medical instrument manufacturer, has strengthened its neurosurgical products line with the completion of its previously announced $1.045bn purchase of Johnson and Johnson (J&J’s) Codman Neurosurgery business
http://www.medicaldevice-network.com/news/newsintegra-acquires-jjs-codman-neurosurgery-business-for-104bn-5939373/
My prediction is over $2.00 by December
So the CEO's reaction to the FDA approval was quite a shock...
*Chief Executive Yells "Sell!'
Five days after announcing the much-anticipated FDA approval, the president/CEO Todd Pope dumped a whopping 600,000 shares of the company stock. So the man who best understands the pluses and minuses of the TransEnterix robot is unloading stock at a time when the product has just attained the marketing approval that's supposed to turn the company around? If the CEO's selling now, we're selling.
(Source: Company SEC filings, TheStreetSweeper)
He's not the only recent inside seller. The chief financial officer, Joseph Slattery, reports he just dumped 23,391 shares in order to pay for 150,000 shares through his cashless warrant exercise. Mr. Slattery's warrants are part of a raft of cheap, expiring warrants that ultimately threaten to dilute current shareholders, as explained below under "More Dilution Looms."
This is a $3.00 dollar stock before FDA, $10.00 dollar there after lezzzzz GO TITXF!!!!!!!
I'm gonna double my share account 100%
We go down in stock price per share after every appearance, what a disappointment these ass clowns bring to the validity this product has to the medical community.... Wake up
McNally you are who your friends are... is this product a joke???
This stock is a gift at $1.00 let's bring it to Dollar LAND!!!!
I hope the software/data/analytics come from Verb, an announcement in December would be a great Christmas for all Titan Shareholders
He prolly unlike it after he read this message board titan/verb/ethicon
I didn't see his like
I want my 40k back please give us some .58 in the next week
7 sales since CE mark in 2011 !
Real winner......
Interesting CONNECTION
Verb Press Release 1/1/17
“This is a tremendous achievement for Verb and our COLLABORATION PARTNERS at Ethicon, and Verily,” said Verb Surgical CEO Scott Huennekens.
“Verb is a company driven by taking action for surgeons and patients. Completing this prototype milestone was an achievement that we aimed for a year ago, and I’m excited to say we achieved it and are on track with our development schedule to deliver
###Surgery 4.0 with our platform###continued Huennekens.
Titan Website
Evolution of Surgical Care
1. Open Surgery
Broad application
Requires significant hospital stay and recovery time
Significant risk of adverse events
2. MIS
Minimally Invasive Surgery (“MIS”) has been a growing trend over the past 25 years
Reduced hospitalization time
Reduced risk of adverse events
Requires highly skilled surgeons
3. Robotic Surgery
Further expands upon the benefits of MIS
Robotic procedures have grown from 1,000 procedures in 2000 to 650,000** in 2015
However, most robots are expensive and have procedural and operational limitation
4. SPORTTM
A premier solution that transforms the challenges facing robotics today
Significantly more affordable, agile and versatile as compared to existing robotic solutions
Verb/JNJ /CollaborationPartner=Titan
RACKO TITAN/VERB/ETHICON
Sheeet I'd be happy with .58 and a break even
Disruptive Dynamics in Healthcare and the Impact on Medtech
The evolution of the U.S. healthcare industry has been a matter of both regulatory change principally catalyzed by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its imperative to shift the industry's business incentives from ?volume to value" in addition to transformation compelled by macro-trends like the rapid advancement of technology and big data and their increasing accessibility to individual consumers. The impact on medical device, or medtech, companies is multifold: they are experiencing the pressure of reimbursement cuts indirectly through interactions with their customers, and they are also witnessing out-of-industry companies like Apple and Google testing capabilities in the traditional medtech domain.
Consolidation between and among payers and providers, who represent key customers of medtech, has contributed to parallel consolidation trends among device companies. Greg Davis notes that medtech companies have observed intense provider consolidation and reacted accordingly: ?Medtech companies are continuing to consolidate at a rapid pace, making a scale and size play. Especially as payers and providers grow more consolidated, this approach helps the medtech players remain at the negotiating table, by enabling them to talk about a wider range of products." Moreover, Rick Anderson points out that device companies, particularly those in commodity categories, are ?facing tremendous pricing pressure" from payers and providers, and have reacted by leveraging acquisitions in an effort to, ?get too big to ignore they want to ensure that the payers and health systems and integrated delivery networks have to pay attention to them."
The shift in traditional purchasing dynamics for devices has also impacted how medtech companies approach selling, as they increasingly need to engage a larger stakeholder group and acknowledge the emerging emphasis on value. According to Davis: ?for decades, the med device industry has been focused on the physician as the key decision maker. But now many physicians are employed by hospitals; while they're still at that negotiating table, they're only a single voice at the table today." Additionally, medtech companies are responding to the needs and preferences articulated by their customer base and regulators by increasingly considering broader contracting arrangements that cover larger product sets and reflect the emphasis on value and risk-sharing that is ubiquitous today among payers and providers. Davis says that device companies are expressing ?interest in getting into the services side of the business; they're talking about developing more complete packages that might mean they get paid based on the continuum of care, rather than for a particular implant or other device."
That said, Rick Anderson suggests that there's an element of dissonance between what many medtech companies communicate publicly versus carry out in day-to-day business operations: ?They're saying all the right things and claim to be figuring out population health, but the absolute truth is that most are really doing nothing about it in fact, if they were really to enable population health initiatives, it would disrupt their business model; having to deal with things like risk-sharing would be inconsistent with how they sell their products."
Medtech companies' lack of substantive action on the population health front has facilitated the entrance of out-of-industry players like IBM and Alphabet (Exhibit 1), who, in Anderson's words, are ?looking over the fence at healthcare, and saying, ?we can innovate in that space.'" While medtech companies collect and manage enormous amounts of data, Anderson and Davis suggest that technology companies like IBM Watson and Verily are the driving force behind new data analytics partnerships with established medtech players like Medtronic and Johnson & Johnson. Anderson says, ?the people who are really doing something on this front are the data people, like those at Verily; it's those tech companies who really understand the value of the data, and medtech is chasing rather than leading those partnership conversations." While early examples of these partnerships like Verb Surgical and Galvani Bioelectronics still have yet to launch major product offerings, Anderson and Davis agree that the wealth of data housed in the medtech space is likely to continue attracting the attention of out-of-industry innovators.
Positioning for Success Emerging Models For Medtech Dealmaking
In reviewing industry dynamics and the deal activity of medical device companies, Anderson and Davis describe a cast of archetypes that are likely to emerge as various players leverage different strategies and more specifically, types of deals to cope with industry-wide disruption. Anderson observes, ?bigger companies are deciding, as we speak, whether to be ?too big to fail' or to be technology innovators." He comments that the largest global players like Johnson & Johnson are more likely to choose the former, because, ?they're giant players with an unmatched global footprint; their strategy will be to occupy categories where they can win with scale." Companies like these, in Anderson's opinion, may invest modestly in innovation, but generally will play a consolidator role, operating under the assumption that ?they can buy whatever they want at whatever price."
Anderson also describes an alternative approach, in which companies like Siemens, GE, and Philips seek to vertically integrate and make targeted investments in particular services and therapeutic areas. The key to making this a winning strategy, according to Anderson, is to pick the right verticals that are well-positioned for innovation.
Underpinning both of these approaches is a heavy preference for acquisition on the part of traditional medtech companies. In Davis' words, ?large medtech companies have historically relied on a model of buying innovation from small companies, and then throwing it into their big company sales engines." However, both Anderson and Davis point out the pitfalls of this attitude, commenting, ?after the financial crisis, throughout 2008-2009, there was almost zero startup activity in medtech the largest hole ever in our industry is playing out right now, and the big companies are complaining that there's nothing to buy." Anderson says, ?the biggest medtech players are blindly going about what they've been doing, thinking the ecosystem will produce more companies when in fact, the tech folks like Qualcomm and Google see this as an opportunity to come in and disrupt their businesses."
Creative Approaches to Medtech Deals
Faced with a shortage of conventionally attractive acquisition targets, some medtech companies are turning to partnerships and creative deal terms to alleviate the stress of investing in early-stage, high-risk startups. Anderson remarks that while large device companies are ?starving for growth," many remain reluctant to make investments that are not accretive on day 1. Moreover, there's real risk of crushing new startups with heavy corporate structures, policies, and management. That said, Anderson argues, ?there's an awakening happening these companies are realizing that they can support off-balance sheet R&D units, and then leverage their global footprint to sell and share margin."
Arguably the most creative of these partnership structures are what Anderson calls ?build and buy" deals, a form of synthetic joint venture or phased acquisition between a startup technology company and its venture capital or private equity partners on the one hand, and an established medtech player on the other. The parties pre-agree to an overall partnership timeframe, development and other milestones, incremental funding commitments, exit ramps, and other key deal terms. As the partnership launches and progresses, the startup company gets access to capital in pre-agreed portions by way of convertible debt, off of the larger company's balance sheet as it achieves the predetermined milestones. Those milestones pertain not only to proving and scaling the technology in question, but also may include integrating the startup organization and its capabilities into the larger company's structure and product suite. If successful, the larger company will officially acquire the startup at the end of the programmed collaboration period, having already proven out the technology, tested the relationship, and proactively addressed the logistics of integration.
There are several clear benefits to this type of deal structure. In leveraging a ?build and buy" deal, large medtech companies have an opportunity to more exhaustively vet and nurture emergent technologies before taking major hits to their P&Ls. Startups receive the funding they need, but in Anderson's words avoid being ?tinkered to death" by the corporate structure and processes of an established medtech company. Looking ahead, Anderson believes that this type of collaborative transaction will be an appealing mechanism to de-risk key investments while fostering critical innovation in the medtech ecosystem.
Like most of the healthcare industry, Davis and Anderson agree that the medtech sector today is in a transitional period, anticipating a ?tsunami" of digital innovation and beginning to leverage collaborative deals as a means to capitalize on it. The companies best positioned to succeed will be those who commit meaningfully to innovation and are willing to flex collaborative partnership muscles that have been neglected by medtech players historically.
Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2017/10/prweb14763875.htm.