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.
It could be that I misunderstood him.
I would apologize if that was the case.
So you don't know but you can predict the future of this industry and why would that be.
Why would you even think that surgical robots have to be like an aircraft producers. You can't just purpose your belief as a fact because it isn't. Boeing manufactures all its own parts unlike car industry. Why wouldn't you compare aircraft industry to car or truck industry then. Just because you picked up the most expensive product does not mean that is a valid comparison. Surgical robots are not crashing and airworthy either.
How many surgical tool providers are there? 1000s
What you demand to be the way healthcare suppliers to be, locked up by few companies is not the reality on the ground and it can not be a functional reality either because there is vast competition in healthcare.
If you are an ISRG stock holder then too bad, it is not going to stay the same. The big guys will buy out the smaller guys but no one will own the whole market because they can't supply the whole world.
A pilot can fly many types of aircrafts and each aircraft carries 100s of people. They get certified for each craft and get simulator training for each type that they want to fly.
A surgeon can only operate on one person at a time. A surgeon will be required to use many instruments and non invasive surgical tools do not work the same and they use many different brands. The non-robotic surgical tools for non-invasive surgeries are harder to use than robots as they are not very flexible and are being used all the time and that is why robotics came to play because they are easier to use and not harder.
Billions of people in this planet need 1000s upon 1000s of surgeons and a lot of surgical tools and robots to allow for non-invasive surgeries.
Costs for surgeries are also inclusive of duration of stay and robotics will take off because sooner or later some surgeries will be much easier to perform with them and hospital stays become shorter.
Surgeries with single port robots can be performed faster than multiport by the way.
What I stated is true. Whoever buys the patent is going to pay some actual dollar value and hence the value is no longer intangible, that is why they can declare it. The buyer can declare the purchase price of the patent as its value but not the owner "before" it has been sold. The sale of intangible assets actualizes them.
The value of a purchased patent can go up and the growth in value would be still intangible and not appear on the books.
So you know: Not declaring intangibles such as patents by Titan is not about taxes. It is about financial rules . The patent that have been purchased can appear in financial statements but not patents that been developed in-house and by the company and hence and those are treated as intangibles. In fact that is a rule developed by the financing regulators to prevent cooking of the books.
"Valuing Intangible Assets
Businesses can create or acquire intangible assets. For example, a business may create a mailing list of clients or establish a patent. If a business creates an intangible asset, it can write off the expenses from the process, such as filing the patent application, hiring a lawyer, and paying other related costs.
In addition, all the expenses along the way of creating the intangible asset are expensed. However, intangible assets created by a company do not appear on the balance sheet and have no recorded book value. Because of this, when a company is purchased, often the purchase price is above the book value of assets on the balance sheet. The purchasing company records the premium paid as an intangible asset on its balance sheet."
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- An intangible asset is an asset that is not physical in nature, such as a patent, brand, trademark, or copyright.
Businesses can create or acquire intangible assets.
- An intangible asset can be considered indefinite (a brand name, for example) or definite, like a legal agreement or contract.
- Intangible assets created by a company do not appear on the balance sheet and have no recorded book value. "
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/intangibleasset.asp
Not declaring intangibles such as patents is not about taxes. It is a financial rule. The patent that have been purchased can appear in financial statements but not patents that been developed in-house and by the company and hence and those are treated as intangibles. In fact that is a rule developed by the financing regulators to prevent cooking of the books.
It is amazing to me that some people who you are reading who claim to be gurus and experts are not educated enough to know that basic fact or trying to mislead the board.
"Valuing Intangible Assets
Businesses can create or acquire intangible assets. For example, a business may create a mailing list of clients or establish a patent. If a business creates an intangible asset, it can write off the expenses from the process, such as filing the patent application, hiring a lawyer, and paying other related costs.
In addition, all the expenses along the way of creating the intangible asset are expensed. However, intangible assets created by a company do not appear on the balance sheet and have no recorded book value. Because of this, when a company is purchased, often the purchase price is above the book value of assets on the balance sheet. The purchasing company records the premium paid as an intangible asset on its balance sheet."
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- An intangible asset is an asset that is not physical in nature, such as a patent, brand, trademark, or copyright.
Businesses can create or acquire intangible assets.
- An intangible asset can be considered indefinite (a brand name, for example) or definite, like a legal agreement or contract.
- Intangible assets created by a company do not appear on the balance sheet and have no recorded book value. "
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/intangibleasset.asp
He said that he has been short at $2.50. True or False, who knows.
Here is a Canadian company that is worth a lot and has no income other than from patents. If patents were worthless then it should not have existed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiLAN
Sales are not the assets. This company has patents and intellectual property that is their main asset and a product that is just to be going for approvals.
The product's patent alone are worth more than a billion
To produce a similar device like this from scratch will cost more than a billion and it will take a decade. I wish you had a clue.
It this robot was developed by a giant company, the cost of would escalate very rapidly. Making it according to surgical specs would escalate the cost automatically because 10s of people would be working on that alone.
There would be 1000s of emails daily about meetings that would take half a day to just read and respond to.
They would have meeting about leadership skills and they would hire consultants to teach brainstorming and things like that so people would get side tracked daily.
Software and hardware quality assurance alone would cost a billion. Top down design, coding, manufacturing and testing would be instituted so different groups would be working on each task and there would be a lot of meetings about who did what and things that have gone wrong.
The marketcap on this thing is pocket change.
Even if it was not approved, some company in Asia can buy it, massage it and have it approved in their own turf and make a lot of money on it.
Shorts are desperate.
For the record, ripoffreport has been involved in fraud and extortion.
"In March 2017, the Italian Data Protection Authority affirmed that Ripoff Report's activities — namely, Ed Magedson's requests for money to edit web pages — are illegal in Italy.[32] The Italian authorities also noticed that Ripoff Report's web servers are occasionally not reachable from Italy in order to evade controls by the authorities themselves.[32] Besides, they noticed that some web pages — which were being investigated by the authorities — were deleted out of the blue by the website owner, despite the claim that Ripoff Report does not remove reports.[32]"
Ripoff Report's legal page claims that "you can't sue Ripoff Report just because we provide a forum for speech"
"Two Australians sued Google over their failure to remove links to defamatory content on Ripoff Report. In February 2011 Dr Janice Duffy filed defamation proceedings in South Australia.[17] In 2015, Duffy prevailed in her defamation case against Google for serving libelous comments, originating from Ripoff Report, and allowing its auto-complete function to assist users in finding the content. As of October 27, 2015, unresolved issues in the case are "...the defences of triviality and time limitation, the application for an extension of time, and causation and quantum of damages." [18][19] In February 2013, Jarrod Sierocki filed defamation proceedings in Queensland.[20] Sierocki won $287,788.00 in damages and interest against a former partner and client who were forced to admit that they had defamed SIerocki on Ripoff Report's un-redactable forum. A related case against Google appears to be working its way through the Australian courts"
"Ripoff Report's publisher, Xcentric Ventures, LLC, unsuccessfully sued consumers and their attorneys for malicious prosecution in federal district court in Phoenix, Arizona in 2011"
"Ripoff Report's webmaster affirmed that positive posts about a company are not allowed in the website. Therefore, the court concluded that the website's owner is not a neutral publisher, because, through large fees that companies must pay for the website's advocacy programs, it has an interest in, and encourages, negative content.[28][29]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripoff_Report
I grasp ok. Titan will selling them a lot of shares for cash at 20% discount to current value and that makes a lot of sense. 1.67/2.04 = 81%
The shorts want to steal the market cap instead.
ripoffreport is a rip off itself.
Its reports are sold for cash and it is NOT accredited.
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/online/ripoffreport.html
You are math challenged obviously and giving lectures here too.
And Titan with get the $35 million in cash so fraction of a million is the cost of capital.
There is no loss. Titan gets the cash.
nonsense.
If Titan issues more shares, their ownership ratio would automatically go down and not up. So they have to buy shares just to retain the same ratio.
If they owned the stock and complaining to the company by calling them then that would be fine.
Being a short and demanding a lower price from the longs is not about fairness.
Yes I am dead serious. Look at my reference. The reporting period does not match the price so it was not dumped in Q2 and that is untrue
Look at CVI case, how is 691,623 shares be worth $167,000 in Q2!!
It was only 70,748 shares and that is the first column.
And you did not post all those that kept their share.
These are not massive amount of dumping either. It is minute.
This review is from last year and I can't see a single port in there that was released and FDA'ed and yet unknown. Maybe they bought the failed EndoMaster and modified it but I recall that some Chinese company had bought that one.
https://publishing.rcseng.ac.uk/doi/full/10.1308/rcsann.supp2.4
My gut feel is that they have a simple bed-attached multi-port single handed robot. Perhaps they have partnered with Versuis which seems to controlled with a wireless protocol and so multiple of them can be engaged.
Or perhaps Mazor has designed something in-house a while back and now releasing it.
At this point we have to wait and see. We will know soon.
When the difference between bid and ask is 1 cent, people have to sell the bid. Using my service the difference is almost always 1 cent and there is no in between price.
These are medironic patents. Search through them and let me know. I checked 2014-2018. Could be patents before that.
I found only one that is recent:
10/26/17 / #20170304617
Stimulation probe for robotic and laparoscopic surgery
https://stks.freshpatents.com/Medtronic-Inc-nm1.php
The patents would be probably inherited from Mazor Robotics or another unknown company that they have bought in Europe perhaps!
https://stks.freshpatents.com/Mazor-Robotics-Ltd-nm1.php
These are the partners in Aspire Capital and they are connected to many foundations. They don't appear to be involved in any fraud. I checked some of their newer investments and they are invested in biotech stocks going through trials
If you press on the news, you will see some of their investments. I found many in the news that are not in there .
https://relationshipscience.com/connections/erik-j-brown-3991668
https://relationshipscience.com/connections/steven-g-martin-3760637
https://relationshipscience.com/connections/christos-komissopoulos-4411762
recent example
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/05/10/1822145/0/en/Aptose-Announces-Commencement-of-Previously-Announced-20-0-Million-Common-Share-Purchase-Agreement-with-Aspire-Capital-Fund-LLC.html
They invested in May and the stock price has gone up
https://web.tmxmoney.com/quote.php?qm_symbol=APS&locale=en
I have answered that several times.
They are buying the robot and its patents and not the designers. People can not be bought out. They may decide to stay or leave and they can start their own companies if they are very talented and organized so there.
Every other position can be contracted or hired if a company wants to market the product and the buyers with that much cash already have those employees.
If a company is buying another to design a new robot or gadget, it is a speculative venture at a high cost because the outcome will be a decades away and slower than the startups and no guarantee to have the right stuff to be marketable in future.
If it was approved, it would have $1 billion dollar market cap.
So your comment is not a valid one.
Why don't they buy TRXC then. That company a lot of employees but not the right robot for the times.
Designing a new robot that will be highly in demand can not be done by speculating on a company that does not have it already built. It will take millions upon millions to fund those salaries. The most valuable employees are not under any obligation to stay either and many have already collected a lot of money from being bought out and will like to be like yourself retiring to expensive paradise.
That is why buying TMDI is going to be profitable because they are focused on one design and they can improve it that line of robot forever. They won't spend billions making a new device with unknown prospects.
Why don't they buy TRXC then. That company a lot of employees but not the right robot for the times.
Designing a new robot that will be highly in demand can not be done by speculating on a company that does not have it already built. It will take millions upon millions to fund those salaries. The most valuable employees are not under any obligation to stay either and many have already collected a lot of money from being bought out and will like to be like yourself retiring to expensive paradise.
That is why buying TMDI is going to be profitable because they are focused on one design and they can improve it that line of robot forever. They won't spend billions making a new device with unknown prospects.
It would be absolutely insane to claim that a private equity fund will dump what is the their starting asset in a company , 1 week after their first investment.
Their mandate is to invest in companies that will make them money.
It is extremely hard for them to find a suitable company with a better future than TMDI that is this close to finish line.
He is probably talking about "Private equity funds"
"Private equity funds more closely resemble venture capital firms in that they invest directly in companies, primarily by purchasing private companies, although they sometimes seek to acquire controlling interest in publicly traded companies through stock purchases."
"Unlike hedge funds focused on short-term profits, private equity funds are focused on the long-term potential of the portfolio of companies they hold an interest in or acquire"
"private equity funds usually dictates a requirement that investors commit their funds for a minimum period of time, usually at least three to five years"
"There is also a substantial difference in risk level between hedge funds and private equity funds. While both practice risk management by combining higher-risk investments with safer investments, the focus of hedge funds on achieving maximum short-term profits necessarily involves accepting a higher level of risk."
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/121614/what-difference-between-hedge-fund-and-private-equity-fund.asp
In other words private-equity firms reduce their risk by investing their money in many entities with different risk profile. Their investors are willing to take the given risk profile. There are tax-avoidance schemes that invest in these things as well.
Sounds good to me. It is specific and identifies the milestones.
thanx.
Like the ink for printers or coffee pods for coffee-makers etc . It is the consumables and service fees that make most of the profit for these companies.
Single port is more expensiv because I believe that it is a more complex robot to design and control. I have read that ISRG's is 2 million previously too.
"Advantages
Many robots are limited by the use of motorized wheels. However, there are many advantages for building a robot that mimics the motion of a snake. Several advantages for movement of a snake robot are listed below:
Move across uneven terrain, since it is not dependent on wheels
Possibly swim if water-proofed
Move across soft ground such as sand, since it can distribute its weight across a wider area
Also, from a systems standpoint, the snake robot can be very modular with many redundant segments. As a result, it is very easy to replace broken segments as well as shorten or lengthen the robot.
Disadvantages
Although there are many advantages for building a snake like robot, there are several disadvantages which are listed below:
Low power and movement efficiency
High cost of actuators (servos or motors)
Difficult to control high number of degrees of freedom"
http://hades.mech.northwestern.edu/index.php/Robot_Snake
A surgical robot can not be made in someone's basement and FDA approvals can not be funded by cutting lawns unlike many other technical fields where a lot of work can be done on the cheap using highly talented people.
All surgical and medical instruments and drugs are funded by stockholders and their cash. It is not a field that you should be investing if you don't want to pay for development and approval costs.
'The price tag on a da Vinci is about $1.5 million. '
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2019/02/14/intuitive-surgical-stock-robot-surgery-da-vinci-alphabet-jnj-ceo-gary-guthart/#2d5f0539a37b
'A single robot costs about $2 million.'
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/is-da-vinci-robotic-surgery-revolution-or-ripoff-021215#1
But they make money for disposable attachments too.
Claims of a private conversation with a single officer of company that is not made public is not really material evidence in any case and neither such a comment proves that there has been no infringement.
ISRG is accused of patent infringement by others so they can be in fact be doing so because mechanical devices do not have millions of methods of working, operating and interacting like software devices so they have smaller degree of freedom for avoiding infringement of existing patents.
"Ethicon filed patent infringement complaints against Intuitive in U.S. courts in 2017 and 2018, arguing the robotic surgery specialist’s EndoWrist and SureForm staplers and instruments used in laparascopic surgery infringe its intellectual property. The trials are set for October 2019 and October 2020."
https://www.medtechdive.com/news/us-trade-commission-probes-intuitive-imports-after-jj-complaint/558130/
It may be sufficient and if not, the process can perhaps be repeated and the dilutions will be relatively small compared to the previous rounds and the predators can not sit on the stock and waiting for a dilution and steal the market cap. The marketcap will be less prone to predatory behavior because it will be protected by the partners. The partners will not act like scaredy cats.
As you can see the shorts don't have any sensible talking points that they can use to scare the longs. They have no scheduled doomsday clock for dilution. That game has ended.
Sure there has been, most and a lot of software companies.
Here is a few. Couple of them are one person companies.
https://hackernoon.com/50-big-companies-that-started-with-little-or-no-money-4ef1b68aac25