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.
Its called math.
No I don't know the company from which some of the design for HUGO came from.
Am I to assume this other company never became a part of MDT?
MDT intends to grow it's business in the RAS surgical robotics market place through acquisitions, and the shortest distance between creating a SP surgical robot, and owning one is to negotiate with TMDI. Now.
Time and opportunity wait for no one.
The previous 59 out of 65(?) are my points of reference.
Regards,BK.
Patents.
It's called deductive reasoning, and math.
1) I'd make a reasonable supposition that MDT would not spend cash on the speculation of a patent pending, and not actually approved.
2) Approximately 33% of patents available at the time of the agreement would be - actually 12-15. I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Regards,BK.
Intelligent Questions,
The following questions are paramount, and germane to MDT creating a winning strategy from which to compete against ISRG. Otherwise, why create HUGO at all? Why does HUGO exist? These questions are directly applicable to the speculation regarding the benefits and reasons to have discussions - now, regarding a BO, or further agreements with TMDI.
You can start by answering the following: How will MDT build an SP robot from only 15 patents, for camera(s) and end effectors? Without spending 4-5 years doing it, spending more than $350M and assuming the risk that the design will pass through USPTO.
If MDT does make one - +5 years in the future, there's additional competition against ENOS and another global company? So now MDT competes against ENOS (with some of the same IP) and ISRG? With 1 decision - MDT doubles the competition. So you think MDT will actively work to create that competitive scenario? Remember - Martha hates to share.
MDT established those Loan conditions and limitations to keep competitors away from TMDI. I speculate that it's also a test and evaluation of TMDI's capabilities as an R&D company. The fact that once the loan is paid, any "cover" from which MDT required those severe limitations on communication with other companies, is gone. All that work to establish limitations, to let them evaporate without further negotiations? 1 step forward, 2 steps back?
Why only HUGO? Presenting multiple options simultaneously during a customer meeting is called a leveraged sales strategy. MDT does not have a leveraged sales strategy with only HUGO. I would never try and compete with ISRG, with only HUGO. Presenting HUGO to capture an ISRG account, with only a single RAS device has a very low success rate. This is far, far from optimal. I would go so far as to say it's a waste of time.
I understand the context of competition, and ISRG WILL create problems that must be addressed, with contingencies. MDT has the ability to change the RAS competitive dynamic and counter those problems FOR THE NEXT 20-30 YEARS by owning TMDI IP and ENOS. An optimally better sales proposition, if you want to compete with ISRG. These points are additional speculative reasons MDT should be negotiating to keep TMDI away from the competition - right now. Time and opportunity wait for no one. Do you think ISRG will let their R&D department go on hiatus for the next 5 years? Time and opportunity wait for no one.
So do we conclude that you think MDT only wants to compete with HUGO? That's your theory? If it isn't please tell us which RAS SP they should be pursuing - right now. Which other RAS SP company are they currently working with? Those are additional intelligent questions.
Or do you think MDT wants to create their own SP organically? Which is totally contrary to the CEO's statements as to how they WILL be successful going forward. Acquiring assets is his forte, and stated business model from which to grow the company and revenue. Do you don't believe him? That's another intelligent question.
Sometimes - as in this case, keeping this IP away from the 800# gorilla is critical. If ISRG gets this - MDT will be seriously hurt, with the inability to recover within +5 years, and perhaps much longer.
Timing and opportunity wait for no one. MDT is here - now. That's why I think TMDI and MDT are in negotiations to extend this partnership, ultimately into a BO. MDT has done it +60 times this way.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Thank you.
From my perspective, the basis of intelligence is not from messages written on an investment board. Clearly you've proven that.
Further, sure - I voted to move to the NASDAQ which required the 30:1 split. I paid the price and own the decision.
To your point that there's no evidence of talk of any negotiations, or a BO. There is evidence to the contrary, if you recognize it for what it is. The 4th milestone has been extended. Only MDT benefits from that extension of time. I've explained that theory before. Maybe it's time to shake your etch-a-sketch and google it?
My theories are based on the main point that MDT is here, and they've done this dance more than 60 times, the same way. And my logic makes sense. I'll compare mine to yours, and conclude yours is very thin. Mine has multiple elements, when in combination create too much activity from which to conclude otherwise. You continually forget the Loan, tied to a separate development agreement, with ridiculous terms and conditions far beyond a simple loan from which to pay off a consultant agreement. And MDT HATES to share revenue from markets other competitors compete in. Why would MDT only license 15 patents, for only camera and end effector technology and share any IP with TMDI? Remember - they hate sharing.
You've never answered how MDT will build an SP robot from only 15 patents. Without spending 4-5 years doing it, spending more than $350M and assuming the risk that the design will pass through USPTO. And if it does - 5 year in the future, only to compete against ENOS and another global company? That makes no sense. Remember - Martha hates to share. The fact that these questions - paramount to the competitive stature of MDT, proving you don't know, or understand this critical issue.
MDT is in the business of RAS medical devices and just launched their first attempt at competing with ISRG. Far, far from optimal and wouldn't want to wage war with only HUGO. Presenting only HUGO is a huge drain on sales resources, time and low productivity. I understand the context of competition, and ISRG will create problems. MDT has the ability to counter those problems FOR THE NEXT 20-30 YEARS by owning TMDI IP and ENOS. Much better proposition if you want to compete with ISRG.
So do we conclude that you think MDT only wants to compete with HUGO? That's your theory? Or do you think MDT wants to create their own SP organically? Which is totally contrary to the CEO's statements as to how they WILL be successful going forward. Acquiring assets is his forte, and stated business model from which to grow the company and revenue. I can only conclude that you don't believe him.
So if I understand you correctly - you don't understand or recognize their business model, their CEO's career history, and his stated intent as to how they will conduct business going forward? Please clarify your position so I don't underestimate your deductive abilities.
You must be right. How is this possible? I commend your vision, albeit looking in a rearview mirror.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Not worth it?
It's worth it to whomever, that spends what's required to own it.
So tell me how MDT builds a world-class RAS SP robot, in fewer than 4-5 years, with unique and defensible IP with only 15 end effector and camera patents? Spending another +$350M, and addressing all of the new development for other elements of the SP robot, and approvals from USPTO? Then tries to compete with ENOS which has been in the market for those 4-5 years?
None of your buddy's will touch those questions. You're turn.
I'm sure you think it's less. But, I don't know why anyone who's invested would argue for anything lower. Do tell.
Show us your estimates. I've stated mine.
That 4-5 years of development time, and risk of the unknown, alone is worth $3B-$5B.
Whomever owns ENOS generates ~$22-$24B in revenue during the course of the next 25 years. And countless other devices with that IP, across multiple platforms.
So where is MDT, or any other global medical device company going to get those protected assets?
Here's a thought: How much damage would ISRG do to ANY other RAS medical device company - if they owned TMDI? Catastrophic for the next 30-40 years. That alone makes it worth it to be able to compete, and own this unique design.
Other possible SP robots won't be ready for a very long time, and may not get to market b/c of patent infringement.
ENOS will be ready in just 2 years, and +200 patents/pending. Looks like a clear runway from here to there, so far.
Don't buy, or sell anything based on my comments.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
What's next?
I can only guess based on the existing agreements, and the history of MDT's acquisitions. Again, this fits but may not move in an exact straight line.
We're coming to the end of the last agreement milestone, with the statement by Mc, that the loan will be paid by the end of the year (possibly earlier). It goes in 1, of 2 directions because it's linear and one has to fall before the rest of the options.
MDT already has requested an extension of time from which (speculating) they continue to negotiate either another agreement, or process for BO, and the BO value. No one EVER takes the first offer, and no ever makes the first offer - the actual target value that which they are willing to pay. I'm willing to say I'm wrong if MTD offers $6B-$10B right now. Not likely, so every step of the negotiation must feel like it's been earned, so each side feels like they've accomplished something in return for the compromise. My best guess is MDT is wrangling for another extended agreement, to support the series of conversations necessary with their BOD to authorize the final BO amount. Too many moving parts to explain in an email, but I'm sure (collectively) we see both sides.
Net-Net: MDT wants it both ways. TMDI BOD MUST NOT PERMIT IT. TMDI declares their willingness to pay off the loan and not extend the agreements, if they don't get enough cash and commitments/support. This may not sound like a great idea, BUT now time does not remain an ally of MDT. Competition creates stress and makes negotiations move at a different pace, than MDT may otherwise dictate. And MDT can always re-enter before any final decisions. NOTE: This is a scenario that does not need to exist. MDT's done a lot to get a seat as a guest of BOD's meetings. I don't see them going backwards from their position, knowing the condition of all the IP, its cross-applications, ENOS and TLL. I wouldn't bet MDT is a 1-steps forward and 2-steps back kind of company.
Option 1) MDT stays and further engages TMDI. MDT still wants to string this out as long, and as far as possible b/c they are on the inside of TMDI - for now. I'll bet it's an agreement, with a small % of ownership. If I were TMDI I'd offer license(s) to market ENOS in specific markets - none of the majors. TMDI's not going to market ENOS themselves, so they may as well get cash for something they aren't going to do anyway. IF, (big if) at this time, territory marketplace licenses are discussed, that's a big tell that ENOS is further along than many will admit. 60 procedures is a good number from which to know if they have a device that's usable, effective and safe. Dr. Estape would not associate his reputation with a poorly performing device. And IDT he wouldn't have permitted a video either.
THE BIG QUESTION at this stage is: "How much cash, for what % ownership, and will any IP again be licensed?" IT'S GOT TO BE A LOT OF CASH. 5% of TMDI (~7M shares) for $100M is ONLY $2B total value for TMDI (~$14 a share?). I would really negotiate for $150M, at $21 a share (~$3B), and start from their. It's a good basis from which to begin a BO value. Moving the BO value higher as ENOS continues to perform, and IP patents continue to increase. Keep that in mind. This amount of cash would not create a wild sp frenzy like Mazor. It's well below my estimated value of $6B-$10B.
Further, NO exclusive IP licenses, 100% of IP still resides with TMDI until a change of ownership. The % ownership by MDT must not have the ability to limit further conversations with competitors, or the pursuit of a change of ownership. My view - MDT wants it both ways, TMDI BOD MUST NOT PERMIT IT. TMDI's BOD's job is to ensure flexibility, and greatest ownership value. FINALLY - someone got that point across recently as Mc stated as much a few days ago. Great - now they're on record for understanding shareholders rights.
Option 2) MDT agrees to the completion, and TMDI pays off the loan. MDT watches closely and hopes TMDI flounders about. This is the biggest unknown for us, and MDT. If MDT really wants TMDI/ENOS/TLL, it's their nightmare scenario. They have no control of TMDI, and only 15 patents for camera and end effector IP. My biggest unanswered questions would be "how does MDT build an RAS SP robot with only 15 patents?" Now that $150M for 5% ownership looks like a steal.
And why would they consider building a SP which would take approximately 4-5 years (time contains the most risk & is the most expensive element) , $350M (probably more), and unknown complications submitting IP to USPTO? Incredible amount of risk, competing against what's already known about TMDI/ENOS/??? patents. Our patents have broad application, and not just for SP devices. MDT's has an inside edge. Why would they put themselves in the same position as previously stated by them - sharing revenue with competitors in the same market. Martha's already said he hates that. Guess we'll see how much he hates it.
To credit other posters previous messages - they still need to address the natural orifice trans robot surgeries. ENOS has the basic elements to address NOTES too. From my untrained eye, I'd think some of ENOS would need to be made smaller. But, again I'm not a surgeon, and would defer to those that have that experience. My comment is made to include another RAS market as part of "what next," that's been discussed many times here previously.
Some may say I'm dreaming. I say SO WHAT - they're talking about something. This isn't Tiddlywinks - it's highly possible. Why do I think this is possible? Answer: MDT is here. MDT could have gone anywhere in the galaxy, but came here. MDT wants something more than they can make. If they consider buying anything, that "something" has to move them ahead further in time, it must generate a lot of revenue for decades, is unique and defensible, makes Martha look smart, and gives them a strong possibility of market segment leadership, if not complete ownership. The bonus for considering TMDI - is the cross-applications of the IP, and TLL. Oh, and these would be the same benefits for any other global RAS device company. But again, Martha hates that.
We're worth $6B-$10B.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Wristed end effectors.
ENOS's end effectors have already been shown to be able to work in close proximity to each other, and reach in front, or behind each other. So one can support the procedure from behind the tissue while the other works in front. Reach, and working in coordinated motion is the issue, an issue that ENOS does not have. Again, I'll defer to Dr. Estape - World renowned Gyn Oncologist Robotic Assisted surgeon. His credibility is far beyond any comments from non-RAS surgeons that may be posting on this forum.
We've entered a new phase in the TMDI/ENOS/TLL development cycle. Mc laid out the details very well and distinguished the differences between MP and SP and the obvious benefits of the ENOS design. It's the first public salvo, to begin to establish and manage public expectations about the value of the company. Compelling IP, overwhelming amount of IP, and more to arrive daily. ISRG would be stupid not to take a swing at this "little-engine-that-could." MDT would be stupid to provide them with the opportunity. Lot's can happen between now and December. MDT won't let TMDI get out from under the Loan provisions IMO, so they'll have to come up with a boatload of more cash.
Upon doing further research, while over on another site that sounds a lot like stock hits, there's a surgeon that's reviewed vicarious sp unit. In his professional opinion - it has some extreme issues and limitations. No love over there for this other product, or those the would propose its superiority. Opinion based on experience, and a professional that uses daVinci. Just more competitor, and professional references from which everyone here may consider relevant to ENOS.
I'll address this "look at all of the money flowing into the other alternate product." First, those who have, and continue to invest did so to be able to get shares issued prior to the IPO. They're only there to grab the initial offering increase in sp, if/when it occurs. That's TBD. Venture capital companies do this daily. So, I'd classify them as fair-weather-friends. Also, the alternate product would not have the coverage they currently receive, if they didn't merge with the SPAC. Let's keep the situational awareness clear.
Looks like all the pre-presentation chatter about a raise was settled pretty clearly. For now..... or at least until sometime in 2022. But again, if you continuously rant about the possibility of rain, it will eventually rain. Doesn't make you a profound pontificator.
That pretty much clearly sums up the FUD, and faux proposed superiority subject matter.
Again, it's no surprise to anyone that reads my messages, that anyone from the "alternate point of view" group has never answered the question(s) regarding how MDT makes a SP RAS device to compete against TMDI/ENOS from 15 patents. Or how they jump ahead 4-5 years in development, or the risk of developing the additional components and USPTO approvals, additional $350M funding, and the fall-out from the BoD of not addressing the ease from which a unique SP RAS device may be acquired. Which supports the entire statement as to how MDT will conduct business now, and in the future.
If you have a problem, and the money to solve the problem, then you don't have a problem. This premise is only valid if MDT wishes to compete in the RAS medical device market segment, and compete for RAS medical device revenue for the next 20-30 years. Such a ridiculous premise. Unless the CEO and CoB has specifically stated that exact strategy for moving ahead of the competitive business environment, instead of developing competitive products organically.
Ignoring the question does not make it go away. It only makes the question more important and germane to the outcome of the present business environment.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
I know. You guess.
https://www.upcounsel.com/corporate-officer-duties
https://www.stimmel-law.com/en/articles/corporate-officers-duties-and-fiduciary-responsibilities
Question Mc's efforts all you want. Many questioned the lack of communication from Mc in the distant past. Now he's communicating as much as possible, and promoting the company. Then we get your retort. No surprise. What, too much, too soon? Need more time to complain? That addresses officer responsibilities. Now, we can move on.
You have presented a valid point of concern. A possible raise. However ill timed b/c of the amount of cash on-hand, still a possibility. From which there are alternate views besides the ONLY one you've presented for consideration. The sp rose unexpectedly, and pretty significantly prior to the last raise. I'll make a guess, and expect the sp to rise again, IF another raise is done. You can speculate, and short from the increased sp if you desire. Judging from the desperation and pleading for participation in the recent past, shorting hasn't worked out too well. Too much risk for me. If another venture fund - friendly to MDT, jumped in and moves the sp even higher. Again, as I've pointed out, no one can predict what will happen 10 minutes from now, tomorrow, next week or next month.
I've addressed your statement and will again. "So far it seems nobody has an interest in enos…..including Medtronic.
That’s why they licensed the IP." It's called a strategy, when applied using situational awareness. There are many paths to acquire a company, and the process by which MDT has done it +60 times is clear. They don't announce a BO - as their first and only communication. Your recollection of the details of the MDT growth business model is severely lacking. I, and many here have provided the most recent outcomes from the Mazor BO, and the quotes from Martha as to the "mistakes" made during that project. I'm providing real factual information addressing your thesis, as to why it's highly unlikely that you're correct. You're opinion, no facts in support of the alternative argument(s).
I'm sure you understand the process of dating, before engagement, then marriage. It's the same process of discovery, for high-dollar acquisitions. The ONLY way to address the risk of the unknown, and mitigate the adverse effects to the down-side, is to increase the amount of time spent performing due diligence. Time is all there is to permit further investigation. While your faux premise that "no one is interested," may be valid, it's incomplete, and not an entirely objective statement from which the entire view is presented. How surprising...
While you may hope your messages have the desired negative effect(s) of the share price, and thus a smaller value for a BO, I'd bet your efforts will be in vain. I question why you make such an extensive and lengthy effort, for an investment that you purport to have shares.
And it's no surprise to anyone that reads my messages that you've never answered the question(s) regarding how MDT makes a SP RAS device to compete against TMDI/ENOS from 15 patents. Or how they jump ahead 4-5 years in development, or the risk of developing the additional components and USPTO approvals, additional $350M funding, and the fall-out from the BoD of not addressing the ease from which a unique SP RAS device may be acquired. Which supports the entire statement as to how MDT will conduct business now, and in the future.
If you have a problem, and the money to solve the problem, then you don't have a problem. This premise is only valid if MDT wishes to compete in the RAS medical device market segment, and compete for RAS medical device revenue for the next 20-30 years. Such a ridiculous premise. Unless the CEO and CoB has specifically stated that exact strategy for moving ahead of the competitive business environment, instead of developing competitive products organically.
Ignoring the question does not make it go away. It only makes the question more important and germane to the outcome of the present business environment.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
I'm guessing not....
Much to no ones surprise, you know nothing about corporate officer responsibilities. Mc has a fiduciary duty to promote the company. This is one way that can't be disapproved by MDT. These are legitimate efforts to support the company/product/R&D Lab as PR. Oh, and the share price.
With $50M in cash, and another approximately $10M to be paid upon completion of the 4th milestone (Net of the loan payment) it would be highly doubtful.
After the 4th milestone, AND the loan payoff, the gloves come off. We're free to negotiate with anyone, anytime. That would put MDT in a dire situation. Do you think anyone would sell, knowing that news of any kind regarding TMDI and another medical device mfr., or news from MDT would rocket the sp?
The further down the road we get, with more IP - the more expensive we become. Whether MDT makes an offer, or anyone else. Do you doubt that there's more than casual interest from ISRG?
Do tell us how MDT will make a SP RAS from 12-15 patents to compete against ENOS, and with a different medical device manufacturer? How long will it take MDT to build that sp robot? How much more money will that take? Will MDT BoD ask Martha what he's thinking when they say, "Um, you have 15 patents?" "And you want to make another SP that may take longer than 5 years?" "When there's one available, with over 200 patents?" You funny! I'd buy a ticket to listen in on that meeting.
Having MDT as a partner, with co-licensed IP is like having a room full of corporate patent lawyers. Exactly like that. How convenient.
Don't you just love a VERY LARGE RAS device manufacturer CEO with a spending jones?
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Here's your explanation...
I've explained it clearly before, and here it is AGAIN. Thank you for providing a platform from which I present my thoughts and provide supporting details, sighting real quotes from the CEO of MDT, and plausible, logically possible, outcomes.
Your point:
They have 13-15 patents. That's all they want. I understand what you've said. I don't believe any of it. I have not read 1 other email that supports this thesis.
Please tell us what MDT's going to do with 13-15 patents, and how they're going to compete against a completed ENOS, backed by another major medical device competitor? Martha has been quoted as saying he hates sharing markets, and revenue with competitors.
My point(s):
MDT has only 13-15 patents. You can't make a SP RAS device from those alone. They need to develop the transitional pieces from the main IP. The can't just slap them on HUGO either. The transitional pieces also require navigation through the USPTO gauntlet. If MDT would consider building a surgical device using TMDI IP, it will take at least another 4 years, probably 5, and another $350M, with no guarantee that the transition components will pass a patent review. You're not taking into consideration the obvious cost of time (another 4-5 years), IP risk, and the possibility of another competitor getting the entire company/machine/R&D lab.
The easiest way for MDT to solve ALL OF THESE HIGH RISK ISSUES is sitting right in front of everyone. One of the first rules of Business School is; If you have a problem, and you have the money to fix the problem, then you don't have a problem. Risk is the boogey man.
Just to let you in on a secret - Mergers and Acquisitions is a business segment in the real world. There are probably 4-5 really big medical device companies that would like a swing at TMDI.
Also, 20-30 years is a long time to be held out of a market segment. Ask Facetrain. So IP protection is paramount. Your other company is a little thin on that aspect of the business. No one cares about whomever may be throwing money at your other company. I say great, b/c MDT and TMDI will get most of it in patent infringement lawsuit(s). Or your other company will have to make a lot of changes.
If MDT licensed 13-15 early patents, then they know what other patents are available too. Voila! I haven't heard of any company trying to pick a fight with ISRG. You? I don't think anyone will be trying to pick a fight over IP with MDT either. But the MDT BoDs will be asking a lot of questions about why only 13-15 patents and letting a competitor buy TMDI/ENOS/TitanLivingLabs. Truly, that makes absolutely no sense.
Developing their own SP RAS device is "ABSURD." And I'm using that term correctly. The MDT BOD would have his head for going off and trying to reinvent what's already unique, and securely patented. And... Martha's entire career with MDT has been based on acquisitions.
ENOS is done.
TMDI doesn't care about HUGO, and I doubt ISRG does either. Do you think HUGO can be morphed into a NOTES device? Hardly. But ENOS has the basic elements to be adapted to one. It's physics, and the IP from which to adapt the design into specialized applications. Surely you can see the adaptation possibilities?
Also, MDT would benefit greatly from vicarious if they wander into the licensed IP. Worse, should MDT buy TMDI there are more than 200 obstacles through which any competitor will clearly be challenged.
Risk is the boogey man. TMDI/ENOS/TitanLivingLabs addresses MDT's risks.
These points are very real possibilities.
There's your explanation as to why MDT would buy TMDI.
IMO, the real question is; For how much? I've provided that answer in previous emails too.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Brave 11:
Latest would be 06.04.22, unless amended by mutual agreement of both parties. Can't see why Titan would agree to a time extension, unless MDT was going to provide cash (in any form) to get us further down the road toward commercialization. Now, IMO - I don't think MDT waits for that to happen before wrapping up this courtship. The further down the road we get, the more expensive the acquisition becomes. Martha even used those words, by saying we prefer to buy early and grow our acquisitions. Regardless of how "early" Martha thinks they are executing this agreement, Mc should make him pay a LARGE premium. In any negotiation, there should always be a "sweetener."
Summary:
"To support development, Titan has received a senior secured loan of U.S. $1.5 million from Medtronic which was announced on April 29, 2020. The loan, which will be increased by an amount equal to certain legal, transaction and intellectual property related expenses pursuant to the definitive agreements, will be evidenced by an amended and restated promissory note, and will bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum. The loan is repayable on June 4, 2023, or upon the earlier completion of the last milestone under the development and license agreement or a Change of Control of Titan (as defined in the note). Until repayment of the loan, Medtronic may have one non-voting observer attend meetings of Titan’s Board of Directors. The loan will be secured by way of a security agreement entered into by Titan and pursuant to which Titan has granted a security interest in favor of Medtronic in all of Titan’s present and future property including all personal property, inventory, equipment and intellectual property."
The entire scenario and timeline for this loan is an iceberg. You see some of it, but not the important parts. Good question.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Not at all.
You invite my participation, and subsequent supporting arguments - in support of my investment. I mean no disrespect personally. However, if your desire is to say this company/product/investment sucks, I'll tell you why I think it doesn't.
If you wouldn't make comments and present disingenuous, and incomplete information, then I wouldn't have to make countless points regarding your unequivocal lack of objectivity during your efforts to tarnish the potential of this great company, and product.
Give it up. Let "this" what ever it becomes play out, and I won't have a purpose or incentive to point out what I believe are highly possible reasons that this is a unique company, very special product, with a highly likely amazing future, with full disclosure supporting arguments.
You make it sound like I, or take your pick from any of the other posters, have created those redactions. The redactions are there b/c MDT required them. WHY? It must be for a very strategic purpose, otherwise they wouldn't exist. MDT spent a lot of time, effort, and money to put those agreements together in their present form.
Legalese are the tools used by lawyers, to sculpt and craft a document to keep the intent of the agreement within specific boundaries. Boundaries are the "tell" of the true purpose for their existence. There's no benefit to TMDI to redact anything. So I conclude it wasn't TMDI's requirement. There's another supporting argument. MDT didn't put them in there to be coy. If MDT doesn't want Titan, then WHY did they put a loan payoff provision in a development agreement, from which all of Titan's IP is put up for collateral, and the loan can't be paid off before the last mutually agreed upon milestone? Those are ridiculous terms, that are so far out of bounds from a reasonable purpose, or intent, to pay off a loan. And where's the early payoff provision? Titan would want to get out from under the collateral immediately. THAT MAKES NO SENSE. So again, I conclude that MDT wants to tie up Titan for no other reason than to buy an extended period of time, by which Titan can't make a definitive move to partner or become a division of another competitor. Titan would only benefit by getting out from under the agreement(s) as soon as possible - and that's not the intent of these provisions. So MDT has a purpose to keep Titan away from any other company. You tell my why?
I respect an opinion and enjoy a well supported argument. At least make an attempt to present a logical conclusion. How many companies has MDT done a partnership with, and then acquired them? More than 60 out of 65? Please correct my statistics for an accurate representation of their business model.
I am not absolutely positive of this outcome. But I am absolutely positive about understanding and executing contracts. I deal with all levels of government every day. 30 years of government business and contracts experience means I have a unique perspective based on what I read, and the possibilities. All of which do not include redactions.
MDT is just dating TMDI. No engagement or wedding bells yet. But MDT has done this dance many, many times. They're here, looking for ways to increase revenue for the next 20-30 years. IMO.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
You're referencing the wrong post.
These are corporate lawyers. You tell them what to do, not necessarily how to do it. There's a difference that you either don't realize, or are deliberately misstating my point(s).
If.. these same lawyers were told just do blah-blah-blah, and they were the ones that did the Mazor details - then yes I would have told them "how" to do it. Surely, you do recall the run away train that was the share price?
Further, you're references of the distant past issues, ad nauseam, only further illustrate your need for a better reading comprehension filter, upgraded understanding of current events, and a new situational awareness module.
Yes Titan has an ancient history that's not pretty. The business environment is different now. Regardless of the FUD from you, and the other 2 stooges. There's a reference to "your" group think - in legal jargon, known as (ASSAD- pronounced assed, the 2nd A is silent) A Summary Situational Awareness Deficit.
Speaking of situational awareness. You do understand the definition of "estimate," right? Do you understand how a timeline may be missed because of the development of components and software that HAS NEVER been invented before? Which could easily create missed timelines. For most (clearly not the ASSAD group) who invest in cutting edge devices/pharma/software/etc., it's easily understood as they pursue the holy grail of business. A.K.A. PATENTS. You don't get these by copying something that has already been developed. Again, situational awareness deficit.
Your critique of missed timelines, without the full understanding of ALL the decades of device protection owned by TMDI, only shows your ignorance regarding first time creations. Of which, ENOS is just that. I'd bet real money that estimates were given by the development partners initially to make what was created - FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER - and could foresee how many of those would push a deadline, and domino a railroad schedule. Not an excuse, just a real possibility.
And....being sued by a consultant is de rigueur. Just because Titan settled doesn't mean that they wouldn't have won in a court of law. And if the suit was for $5M and the consultant got $1.2M, I'd say they took the offer b/c IF they had a case, the multiple would have been worth the fight. Again, situational awareness deficit.
Lastly - Why would MDT care how TMDI manages their money if they aren't going to do something significant in the future together? And do tell, how in the he!! did the share price get so high, so fast during that raise??? Also, there's this thing called email, and auditors that could have easily addressed any faux concern of proper cash management. And there is also a development agreement committee to oversee progress. So, "as you say" MDT needed to require TMDI to raise $18M - in addition to the $41M they were going to pay for the development? I think what you meant was the $18M was for budget cushion in case the development estimates were too low b/c TMDI was creating "things" for the fist time - from pure thought, not mismanaged. And I'm phrasing that correctly b/c there's direct reference to any IP that which may be awarded to be shared by both.
Which only proves one thing. What TMDI is doing is worth 40% more than what MDT thinks it is, b/c MDT required 40% more cash on hand for the development. See, situational awareness is important b/c now everyone understands how critically important first-time development, and the results (the holy grail) that awaits those that can create something from pure thought.
And email responses like this.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
They want Enos..
B/c they they specifically requested - as a provision of the development agreement(s) a guest observer during BOD meetings. Sure for a development agreement? Highly unusual, and again Lawyers are told what to do. They don't get creative in these type of partnerships. They prevent further risk by including specific language that sets the boundaries of the scope and performance for the entities.
The only reason there was a LOAN with the earliest time possible to pay it back, at the conclusion of the 4th milestone (as part a separate development agreement)? That's only there to buy MDT time. TMDI doesn't need that provision for ANY reason. It's MDT's benefit to have it included.
Is the only reason there is a provision for a guest seat at the BOD meetings is to hear of new developments about the company? It's just a guess, but it's very unusual to create a guest seat during these meetings except to keep a hand on the pulse. IMO it would be a precursor to a right of first refusal clause. Don't need a right of first refusal unless something may happen - and MDT doesn't want that "something" to happen without their knowledge. And a BIGGER question would be: "What's the benefit to TMDI to have an MDT guest attend these meetings?" It's a what's-in-it-for-me type of "tell." That provision could have easily been redacted, but it wasn't so we would be aware. Connect the dots.
And there had to be a provision to excuse the guest (that's the tell) so there was no compromise of attorney-client privilege. Also, b/c MDT does not have any right to know more than what exists in the development agreements, so there is a clause to excuse the guest for private conversations that may be considered competitive in nature. You don't have to know the specific content of "that" meeting to know it's privileged details that include a competitor. MDT only "needs" to know that the conversation took place. They don't need to be present - they're being TOLD b/c they're being excused.
Throughout the course of these agreements, it's the form and content that shows the true nature of their purpose. Redactions are obvious red flags, but the other content is just as informative.
It's not the fact that MDT doesn't have any ownership of TMDI per se, it's the fact that these other conditions and provisions exist
that leads me to conclude that they are interested in ENOS. Otherwise why create them at all? Lawyers are told what to do....
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Lawyers do what they're told...
This is a two-way agreement. The form of these agreements set the tone of the relationship. While MDT didn't want all that was disclosed like in the Mazor partnership - TMDI did want public disclosure b/c Mc needed to have some form of announcement of progress to save his 6.
So that's why we have the redactions and the agreements published.
What's interesting was the disclosures in the new investor presentation. MDT DID have to approve some of that detail, and Mc HAD to disclose it b/c of his fiduciary duties. That investor presentation was another form of communication with the general public to begin to set the foundation for future expectations. We're still a publicly traded entity - until we're not. IMO, the BOD required most of that investor content to limit the lawsuit risk should this come to a BO. Each step of this relationship has to be disclosed, in some form publicly or there's a risk of breach of fiduciary duties. It's more powerful than many may realize.
MDT isn't saying anything b/c again, they don't want Mazor 2.0. While Mc does want some form of Mazor 2.0. Share price appreciation will occur, but the question is when, and what will be the catalyst? That's the exciting part of this investment.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
No, I think MDT keeps licensed IP.
I can't say if there is a time limit on the license agreement(s). They can be modified, or amended. I didn't read anywhere that MDT would have to return IP. But there's a lot of redacted language and no one knows except MDT and TMDI.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
No That's Not How It Works:
TMDI still holds the IP. If another company acquires TMDI, ALL of IP goes with them. Regardless of the exclusivity of the MDT license agreement. All 13-15 patents. Woopy!
You can't keep any facts straight. Put your Etch-a-sketch over your head and shake it, to reboot your laptop. Then Google the agreement(s).
I'd guess Mc just shot down your partners theory of a $200M-$300M BO too.
The BAD NEWS - Regardless of how you may feel about the $41M license fee(s) and development agreements - MDT WILL defend the IP. So if/when your other company tries to use it - MDT/TMDI can crush them. Or if MDT/TMDI agree (mutually) about a co-license, your other company will fund further development of both MDT and TMDI. IMO I don't see that approval anytime ever in the future.
You're a genius for pushing this other company with this level of risk. And as I've shown in previous emails, Gates hasn't invested as much in your other company as MDT has spent with TMDI.
Further, your other company doesn't have the $5B-$10B necessary to acquire TMDI.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Corp Presentation Update
https://theralase.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Corporate-PPT-09213.pdf
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
Yup, he said it.
So what. (not a question.) Milestones are mutually agreed upon completion. The milestone deadline(s) for completion were a forecast, and either party may have had cause to request an extension to a final approval. As was the establishment of an review committee.
As I've proposed in the recent past as to why I think it was a designed delay tactic by MDT, as was written in the Loan Agreement. A Loan Agreement for a payoff of a consultant lawsuit, from which this payoff is a provision of the completion of the development agreement. What does one have to do with the other? Now answer that question.
IMO - It's a built in delay feature from which it gives MDT the option to create more time so TMDI can't move forward - beyond talking with another RAS player that may be interested in TMDI.
So here's your opportunity to propose or present reasonable arguments with ANY possibility of a logical conclusion. Let's hear 'em.
You seem to keep forgetting that there are only finite resources from which to work on both the development agreements and ENOS simultaneously. Situational awareness is a key ability to understand if both are in motion, they will only move 50% as fast, or as far.
That's not a pass, or an excuse. It's a fact that has a direct effect on the outcome of the forecast. Further, there are no dire consequences from which a 90-day delay will cause. SO LONG AS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS IN EFFECT. Further, Dr. Estape established the functionality and capability.
If you're not satisfied, complain to your Mother, your priest or dog. They will care. We don't.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
I was way off about MC. Revised
The number of outstanding shares is 204.28M, so that would be approximately $4.89 per $B MC.
I'm thinking this is a $50-$100 stock, which puts at approx. +$10B-+$20B.
But, something else is telling me that investors want to be on the right side of an investment, and this is so far beyond Amazon, FB or Google.
These meds are messing me up.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
This stock can be very frustrating. Has gone for long periods of time without much movement. But now there's science and proof of lab performance on patients, which this last quarterly confirmed.
This is highly speculative, but the prior lab/petre dish tests are getting proven on patients.
I wanted to inform everyone prior to the next quarterly report which should be late October from the Sept 30 EOQ period. If that report continues to provide patient data that extends the CR in patients that have been treated, and exhibits high CR performance on new patients that have 90 performance data - I don't know what affect that may have. It's all new information.
This is a cure for 1 type of cancer. It has practical applications for many other types that have gone through the same lab vetting process to check for efficacy. It's been reviewed for melanoma, brain cancer and Non-small cell lung cancer.
Someone asked what's the expected sp target? Every increment of $3.50 is approximately $1B in MC. What's a cure for cancer worth? And now Health Canada is testing in their Level4 Microbio Lab for Covid, SARS, and other viruses. What's that worth?
I can't tell how many people, or funds will pile in. I'm thinking this is a $50-$100 stock, which puts at approx. $14B-$28B. But, something else is telling me that investors want to be on the right side of an investment, and this is so far beyond Amazon, FB or Google.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
They're also in Covid vaccine and therapeutic review and testing through the Public Health Agency Canada, National Microbiology Lab.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
The University of Chicago Medicine 7th Study Site
https://www.curetoday.com/view/phase-2-bcg-unresponsive-bladder-cancer-study-gets-the-ok-to-start-enrollment
Phase 2 BCG-Unresponsive Bladder Cancer Study Gets the OK to Start Enrollment
September 1, 2021
Jamie Cesanek
Patients with Bacillus Calmette Guérin-unresponsive carcinoma in-situ will be treated at the University of Chicago in a Theralase study.
The University of Chicago Medicine received approval from the Institutional Review Board to begin enrolling patients in a clinical trial from Theralase in June.
Researchers on the trial, which is the Phase 2 Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Clinical Study, will enroll and treat 100-125 patients who were diagnosed with Bacillus Calmette Guérin (BCG)-unresponsive carcinoma in-situ. These patients must have also shown intolerance to BCG therapy.
“This technology harnesses the power of near infrared light produced by a laser to destroy localized bladder cancer cells that have not responded to standard of care therapy such as BCG. It gives patients an option to consider before bladder removal,” stated Dr. Piyush Agarwal, Professor of Surgery and Urology, Director of the Bladder Cancer Program and Fellowship Director of Urologic Oncology at the University of Chicago Medicine, in a release.
The first patient to be treated in the study received their treatment at Virginia Urology in Richmond, Virginia.
The study will be Theralase’s seventh U.S.-based clinical study site. The clinical stage pharmaceutical company will submit clinical assessment data on the first 25 patients who are treated in the study to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for consideration of breakthrough designation status. So far, 20 patients have been enrolled in the trial, plus three from the phase 1b study.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
Nice Rolling Summary.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
Optimized dosage summary:
IMO> I don't think there needs to be any further discussion as to the summary of optimized dosage and subsequent effects of this study, to date.
Clipped from Stockhouse 08.31.21
https://stockhouse.com/companies/bullboard?symbol=v.tlt&postid=33788524
Right. So then Enrique
Of the optimized from day 1,ever:
8 Total
6 CR
1 NR
1 partial
That makes the 87.5% 90 day response that keeps coming up.
That is really good.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
All by yourself? Really?
Actually, I believe it. No surprise there.
15-16 patents does not an RAS sp robot make.....
You think those get MDT an SP RAS without another $350M and 5-6 years of development time? What about the development risk of the the "other" parts needed to get this robot through the IP maze, then tested and medically certified?
Where are they going to get the engineering bandwidth? They're already working on HUGO..... They don't have a building full of engineers drinking coffee, waiting for the phone to ring.
Think again.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Rocko, to your point:
A few select, very narrowly focused folks on this board keep forgetting that MDT is now an acquisition/buy growth company.
That's the forte of the new CEO and CoB. He recognizes that there are more great minds out in the galaxy than those who may work at MDT. All in an active strategic plan from which to be more competitive, or dominate the competition going forward.
Psychologically, all "you" need to know is the following: When you want to sound intellectually superior, don't call it buying growth. How mentally one-dimensional. You call it buying early and growing it. IDC what he calls it, as long as it's for more than $6B. And those are his exact words. Who doesn't love an RAS device egomaniac with a spending jones?
It's also being objective when you're leading one of the largest medical device companies in the galaxy.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Hmm. Loan payment.
I'd guess that Mc said they were going to pay off the loan with the 4th milestone payment b/c it's the earliest possible option from which to be eligible to pay it off. The earliest. Now why would MDT put a provision in a completely separate loan agreement to pay off a consultant lawsuit, at a much later future date, conditional to a development agreement? Without an early payoff provision? Answer that.
Why issue an EFT, when you can just reduce the 4th milestone payoff by the difference in the amount of the loan. Path of least resistance.
This would appear to be a nothing burger except for the fact that once the loan is paid, then TMDI is free to meet other suitors at will. And it's a public announcement without making a public announcement, that they intend to do so. Which is another reason why there was a public announcement that the 4th milestone completion (by mutual agreement) is delayed until the end of the year. Keeps inquiring minds from jumping the gun. It says "talk all you want," but you can't do anything else until this step is completed.
It's called creating pressure from outside sources from which existing investors would ask MDT what their intentions may be regarding TMDI. Some of their large fund and investors may feel TMDI is a critical acquisition for MDT's success over the course of the next 20 years. That's not a reach, or uncommon for shareholders to voice their opinions and desires to a BOD's.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
It's weak, but you're trying.
Everyone complains Mc doesn't communicate. When he does, what he can, we get your response.
Send him a message, get your questions answered.
No one that reads this board believes you have made any form of a compelling argument with supported points to agree with your assessment of the BO. You don't factor in competition, the real cost/price of time-value-of-ip, previous share price escalation as witnessed by those that formerly owned ISRG, the cost to develop a RAS SP from the IP that has been licensed to the final product, risk of developing an RAS SP from 15-16 patents to other parts of the device to make it safe, and medically certifiable, other RAS BO's.
You're not in the same galaxy.
Try again.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Frank: Manage expectations.
That presentation included information, while true, establishes details from which recent and by inference - applicable BO's have occurred. The question in my mind would be, "How, or are they applicable to TMDI?" IMO, only tangentially b/c TMDI has unique, deep, broad application IP. TMDI also has the ability to continue to develop IP.
The real value of TMDI - as I see it is as follows (edited from a previous BK message):
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Medtronic can't get where they want to be soon enough with only 15-16 patents. Unless you think they can build their own version, which would take +350M and another 4-5 years. B/C they'll have to develop their own R&D for the parts that aren't covered, then apply for the patents, and then see if they are awarded. 4-5 years minimum.
For every year TMDI can save MDT the agony of not being able to enter another new RAS market segment is worth $1B$.
The time value of buying IP. Especially TMDI's IP. It permits MDT to ROLL ahead 4-5 years of their ability to create defensible IP.
TMDI's worth more than $5B.
A) 20-40 year defensible IP, & applicability for multiple applications = $3-$5B
B) Time value (time saved) approx. $1B/yr = 3B-$5B
C) R&D (Titan Labs) approx. $350-$450M/yr
D) Total revenue projections over 20-30 years, only ENOS ~ $23B-$24B
$1.3M x 650 units/year = $845M x 25 years = $21B not including disposables and maintenance.
E) Mazor +$?B for how much projected revenue over 25 years?
F) 5% of current MC of ISRG = $5.7B. Using ISRG's MASSIVE 20x multiple. (That's the proper use of that word).
G) Could vicarious be having trouble getting their applications approved through the USPTO? Now that MDT has licensed IP from us, they would be able to make it very expensive, and both MDT and TMDI could collect penalties and fees if they encroached on the shared IP.
H) Could Colubris be a part of any future acquisitions? Do I recall correctly that the President was seen visiting TitanLabs, sometime in the recent past? Please correct me if that's not true. During the video presented by Dan Kim, at the 15:45 mark - those sure look like TMDI snake arms. The timing appears odd though b/c the presentation was done in 2019.
https://veritastv.org/programs/2019-srs-day-1-danielkimmp4-bfacac
I think I'm in the ballpark ($5.7-$11B) of true market BO value. I think the Mazor deal is relevant, and important to any action toward a BO. IDC what the current share price is. It's being artificially manipulated. Which is why the sp sits where it is until some form of solid confirmation. Don't ask if/when.. no one knows.
There aren't many places to shop for a truly unique SP RAS device in this galaxy. And no NASA/Uber to get you to a different galaxy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
They're in there to manage expectations and possibly limit participation in a BO valuation lawsuit.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Not trying to validate a shorters point.
But, whether $.03 or $.055 it's still the truth. McNally did the worst job of planning, executing and supporting the sp when we entered the NASDAQ. I don't think anyone would be happy with a $1.00 sp pre-split either.
Until TitanLabs was established, my only thought was that Mc was trying to put this boat into any workable condition from which to sell. I'll bet he got an offer, or two but not enough to pull the trigger. Or fend off any BO lawsuits. That's completely changed. And, to his credit when he had the funding did make TitanLivingLabs (TLL) and created an IP juggernaut.
Interesting point(s) - he hired Dr. Genova, then created TLL. Clearly. He needed a VERY bid gun. And you don't catch big fish w/out big bait. I'm grateful Dr. Genova decided this was worth risking his reputation.
It would to be a big risk spending money the company didn't have when they created TMDI US. So the question is how far back was MDT involved, to be sure you (TMDI) would have the resources from which to develop IP in-house? Just leads me to further conclude MDT has been involved for much longer than previously dated events. The leases in Toronto, and now NC were points from which to draw additional clues. TLL does give us a true level of independence should MDT really screw up, and give a competitor an opportunity to bid. And my point - MDT wouldn't have started that far back to assist with funding for TLL, if they didn't have a strong commitment to own TMDI. Why develop an IP juggernaut, to later compete against it? I just don't think we get out of milestone 4 without some form of further MDT agreement with limiting conditions.
The BOD and Mc better understand this next move MUST be the last conditional agreement, and it does not include all of our IP/resources, and have the ability to walk away, with an early payoff provision (should another potential suitor establish their presence). IMO - I don't see MDT permitting that to come to fruition.
The really bad thing about my initial point is anyone that invested pre-split will never be made whole again, without further investment to dollar-cost-average down. It would be nice to know the BOD did exercise good judgement and include conditions for sp performance with his options. The BOD has to realize without those initial shareholders there wouldn't have been a pulse at TMDI from which we exist today.
The bad news is that it's highly unlikely the current larger shareholders would approve any idea that would cut into their profits that were established from a sp that is more recent. So further discussion is unlikely to create an opportunity from which to recover any losses from initial bad performance/planning. So talking about how bad Mc's decision were has become "moot" over time.
I can agree with that.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
I think the sp stability says a lot.
There's been relatively high trading volume, and at times really high volume. The sp is just vacillating in a tight range. I think it is indicative of a large group of owners just waiting for news, or just enough news to move the price and let it fall into this, or another higher range.
If the news changes the investment dynamic then the range goes much higher. Any vaccine information, or therapeutic confirmation would be a catalyst for a much higher share price. Then the upside would be defined by the potential of the new conditions. Those that would take the opposing position would state that management doesn't have the bandwidth to execute to full potential. Much of that argument would not be valid in my mind b/c most of the execution would be controlled in the clinics and labs, so as to remove any missteps by management. Thankfully, so.
I also think you enjoy poking those that have a more robust opinion of the potential for this stock. Again, it's potential that hasn't been fulfilled. Management can't validate a higher sp with just words or communication. It helps, and limits criticism but wouldn't stop someone from doing it none-the-less, if they had a strong desire to do so.
My only regret was not having more to put into the opportunity at a lower sp earlier this year. Just not enough dry powder in reserve.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
I've answered your question now 3 times.
McNally isn't negotiating with MDT, it's the BOD. And an independent review of valuation from multiple independent sources. Then a vote by shareholders.
And the rest of your questions you can figure out yourself.
Since 2019, 3 acquisitions for +1B, and 2 for +3B.
TMDI has better everything, and is worth more.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
66 - Thank you. Great news.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
I agree. The vaccine and therapeutic would change everything.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
Belize, I can't disagree.
But, MDT isn't the only company that wants to compete in the RAS space. So, there's a big question as to who that may be, and how desperate they may be. They are definitely looking, b/c looking has no cost associated with it. And we know TMDI held 2 meetings without the MDT BOD guest present.
I don't claim to be an RAS device, or medical marketplace expert. But I do know and fully understand competition. TMDI is the solution to another 5-8 years of development for any company that wishes to get into the RAS surgery marketplace - in the very near future. 5-8 years is a looonnnngggg time. And there's no guarantee that who ever may embark on developing their own RAS device will get there b/c of IP barriers.
The risk is on everyone else. TMDI's path is clear and the last video is confirmation that the device is usable. Don't know how sophisticated it may be at this point, but it did the job and was acknowledged by arguably one of the most experienced RAS surgeons.
I'm looking forward to what unfolds the rest of this year. It will have periods of ugly b/c of lack of daily trading volume. But that's irrelevant from my perspective - at this time.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
OR Nurse exactly right.
Where is that early payoff provision for the loan?
Conspicuously absent in a loan agreement. No one agrees to a loan without an early payoff provision. Even if they have to pay a little interest beyond the payoff date.
Only 1 (one) (uno) reason that it's not in there. To buy time for MDT. TMDI doesn't need time. They could be talking with any other large medical device mfr. To MDT's detriment.
That agreement, with that single provision is the key to why we are, where we are. When nothing in life is a sure thing, only time gives you the ability to be careful and fully review the purchase.
And what MDT doesn't want are other competitors messing with their largest acquisition, and possibly their most lucrative for the next 20-30 years.
In my opinion the share price will not be $2-$3 dollars. More than likely, 10x-15x times that. The current share price is irrelevant. So it stays low, just buy what you can, when you can.
I want to hear why anyone who reads this board doesn't want 10x-15x a $2-$3 share price.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
$200M-$300M?....
So with 140M outstanding shares, then somewhere between $1.50 - $2.00 is the BO share price?
In my best "Vizzini" voice - "INCONCEIVABLE!"
Regards,BK.
You're incorrect again.
McNally didn't make the milestones.
He hasn't missed a milestone.
Milestones are finished upon mutual agreement. I haven't read anything to the contrary that the completion of milestones is anything other than by mutual agreement, with participation from a review committee.
I never said "completely transformed company." Now, I'm getting a better understanding of your perception filter. I said "the company is in a much better position, and a different company (not completely) than even 2 years ago."
Back to the options, again. The Compensation Committee, through the BOD awarded him those options. It's possible they would rescind them, if you ask. Let us know.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
You have to take the good with the bad.
For all the goodness that comes from a farm, there are places that you don't want to hang out for very long either....
I'm thinking his decision to hire Dr. Genova gives him a little credit. I'd like to know more of what else he's been a part of since the MDT announcement, but it's not public information.
When I don't have all the details, I always consider the issues at hand to be somewhere in the middle of bad and great.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.