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.
Total Evaluable Patients - Great Updates
Total Patient population and Total Optimized Patient population
https://postimg.cc/mPLRXpp4
Updated from April 5 to April 29:
https://stockhouse.com/companies/bullboard/v.tlt/theralase-technologies-inc?postid=34650518
All references in this post from Stockhouse and their respective authors/members.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
MM's are working to make sure there is no further gains to be added from yesterday's volume. They just wait for some of the air to go out of the balloon, and then start throwing out low volume trades to curb the sp appreciation. As long as "someone" is willing to sell below the Ask, at a ridiculously low share prices, then only higher volumes/demand can absorb those trades/shares and move up the sp. Just like yesterday.
It's the volume and demand for shares that requires the MM's to get out of the way of the Ask. Like yesterday. Meaning - they understood yesterdays volume and accumulation. So they didn't throw (much) lower priced shares out to curb the sp appreciation, or they would have been run over with no suppressed sp effect. IMO.
It's all psychological trading. The sky's not falling, and the trend and momentum has been established with the recent company progress.
Soon there will be even more eyes viewing this company's progress and attract more purchases and higher volume.
MM's and shorters are trying to do the same on the Canadian exchange.
A cure/therapy for cancer for $.35-$.50 a share? It's all about the DD and details.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
If you stop for lunch in Santa Fe, say "hi" to Tortilla Flats for me.
Safe travels.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Meghan,
Float is his other alias from another board, that we frequent.
The $B reference is to show what the SP would be if the company were valued at $1B. So for every $1B, offered if there was a buyout then the SP would need to reach approx $3.43.
Nice to hear from you.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
Hi Float:
1000/291.250 approx. 3.43B
I just couldn't remember the exact numbers and used an approximation.
Good to hear from you.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
Quarterly Report is available.
It's good news.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
Rob,
I've answered many of those points, most of which were posted on or soon after you arrived in September.
There are no signs of a buyout except for the similar behavior that ended with a BO of Mazor, and many prior to that. There were no definitive statements about Mazor UNTIL the announcement was made. You're no Carnac the Magnificent.
Would you say it's prudent to take an equity stake in a company that which you've never tested, or taken the time to make an exhaustive evaluation? Just jump right out there.
Call 'em like you see 'em. The audience will undoubtably decide for themselves.
Fact is - we're still at $1.70ish and nothing you've implied has moved it into the basement.
How hard is it to predict the direction of the sp when there's no heavy volume from which to elevate it? It's just share price purchase volume, not the lack of performance of the company.
That appears to be the faux crux of your argument. No? The context of your messages lead me to think b/c the sp is $1.70, that you think there's something seriously wrong with ENOS, or the operation of the company. This is just an observation, but I don't think your questions (to the wrong audience I might add) are directed to the source of the answers that which you seek.
I'm going to suggest to you, and the cadre of those that have a less-than-glossy view of this company to ask all of your questions to the IR department, or McNally. No one on this board will be able to respond to your accusations, answer your questions or address your issues. In what ever light you care to present them. Let us know how that works out.
JMO: You don't have the juice to move the sp so you have to try and create a ground swell/stampede. I say the sp moves when bigger horses than you, or me decide. You didn't have anything to do with the sp appreciation when the sp dramatically moved to $3.50ish. Did you? Neither did I. Did you have anything to do with the sp swing when it came back down? Was that your magic? I don't think so.
I just think this is a great device, good company and a very high-potential investment. Don't ask me when this goes big. I'll formulate a guess, and say "it's going to be sometime after tomorrow."
Good luck. Regards,BK.
Rob, NDA's?
So your definition as it's applied is "customary?" You don't get to make up the content based on pure conjecture. Seriously? You, or anyone else have an idea what occurred between the former SAB members and TMDI.
You miss the purpose of an NDA instrument, and the definition entirely. No surprise.
The NDA is a contract, with specific terms and conditions for performance. Start there and work your way through the logic.
Your points and perspective lead me to conclude you've never read one. Or refuse to consider the possibilities that ANY NDA can contain a myriad of conditions....if it doesn't fit your narrative.
And you comment is accurate about the merit of discussion. We're waiting to read some objective messages.
BK.
Rob,Counter His Point?
Sorry Rob, you've got the messages mixed up. I made the point to clearly establish the definition and content of an NDA. His point (and yours) was constant "should have let or made a comment by Mc or exiting SAB members about TMDI/ENOS, without comprehending the purpose of the legal instrument as an NDA.
You turn the subject to fit your narrative. I post for others to determine their own conclusions.
BK.
Rob,
How sad for you.
Many of US are in the line of fire of Covid. My company works directly with law enforcement, daily. I have family that live in my home in the direct line of Covid as first responders, not a surgical center.
So we're supposed to give this person some sort of pass because they don't understand the context of the subject matter? All the while pretending to understand and mischaracterize the entire premise? Pulleeeze. Go peddle your pity mongering elsewhere.
The issue was whether there's any comprehension regarding NDA's and someone else tried to move the conversation outside the context and direct subject matter of my message. If you (collectively) don't comprehend that which you make a statement about, and are completely incorrect - expect the obvious. No pity.
BK.
The concept of an NDA.....
To no ones surprise some of those on this board that have less legal experience can't make the effort to comprehend or understand the basic premise of a non-disclosure agreement. The contents of which can't be disclosed either.
"A non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is an agreement in contract law that certain information will remain confidential. As such, an NDA binds a person who has signed it and prevents them from discussing any information included in the contract with any non-authorized party."
And for anyone that would suggest, implicitly or otherwise, that any member or former member of the SAB can just make a statement about Titan or any devices disclosed during their membership is entirely wrong. There seems to be a preponderance of evidence in that vein of thought.
Further, going back to any reference to Dr. Estape's comments; There are no full/complete descriptions or understandings with regard the scope or developments in these agreements so by clear example, there may be very little that can be disclosed. Applied logic would lead me to conclude that there would be no benefit to Titan to keep any of the device capability secret. Unless, it's really more adaptable/significant than some may conclude. Again, the basic premise of the entire purpose of an NDA.
Whining about it won't change anything regarding further comments. We will all have to suffer and otherwise sympathize with those that carry a heavier burden, or higher degree of pain.
So be it.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK
RobL Crap-in Crap-out,
Walt Disney, Frank Lloyd Wright, Opra, Ralph Lauren, Richard Branson, Larry Young (Dr. Pepper), Larry Ellison, Even Williams (Twitter), Mark Zuckerberg, Dustin Moskovitz, Michael Dell, Ted Turner, John Paul DeJoria (up to his eyeballs in hair care), Jack Dorsey, Daniel Ek, Quincy Jones, Wayne Huizenga, Spielburg, Henry Ford, Paul Allen, Wilber and Orville Wright.
I'm sure you get the point(s). But get no points.
Let's not forget the most obvious - Plato, Socrates, daVinci, Edison, Jobs, Woz - got his degree a lot later in life, well beyond Apple, and finally Bill Gates.
Genius is everywhere. To me perseverance is most important.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
MDT Deal Part Doh!,
To the group - I am very skeptical of anyone who would present their opinions, of any prior company (TMDI) events as speculation that any positive future events for TMDI, or an increase in share price are not distinct possibilities. Much of the information below including dates and events are found on the company website.
My messages are for informational purposes only, and not for any particular outcome. Any conclusions are my own. Please come to your own conclusions without consideration of what I write.
1) Who would negotiate a settlement of a purported $5M consulting lawsuit (public announcement 06.09.20 settlement of $1.050M), while at the same time announcing publicly that they entered into an agreement with MDT for $10M license for IP, and $18M public offering disclosed 06.04.20?
Check those dates. TMDI gets $1.5M 04.29.20, and settles the lawsuit for $1.050 prior to 06.09.20. Why get a loan from MDT for $1.5M AT ALL? They just announced an $10M IP deal AND an $18M offering - which closed in 2 days?????? How convenient, and quite the coincidence. Answer: I wouldn't. Negotiating the settlement while announcing the IP and dev agreements is not a prudent strategy to settle for a lower amount. The time difference between the settlement and loan amount (by 30 days) is inconsequential. If you're familiar with negotiating anything.
2) Pure speculation "MDT could have offered the BOD $2/share?" - Why would TMDI consider selling for $2/share? Less than $300M? ENOS is in the final stages of being finished with the potential (IMO) to generate approximately $22B during the course of the next 25 years. No one knows if there was any conversation regarding an offer, or for any amount. Clearly there's a risk to keep the company - while it will take more time and funding to get to CE/FDA approval - may be worth it. That's for the audience to draw their own conclusions. The question is why did 2 members of the Board leave? IDK. Leaving may be viewed as a form of protest, but doesn't make sense b/c ENOS is in its final stages of completion. It's a mystery to me.
3) Unless someone can remove the agreement redactions, the instruments and camera are only referenced in the IP licenses, that which I'm aware. Please feel free to inform me if otherwise. No one knows if they are being applied to anything in the development agreement.
Further, sight is the most important of the 5 senses. ENOS lights and cameras should be a critical feature, which they are. Regardless of any insinuations to the contrary regarding Dr. Estapes pronouncements as to the effectiveness of both.
If anyone reading this message has direct experience using ENOS, please let us know. Should anyone believe anything presented in direct opposition with an RAS KOL, without having direct knowledge or experience with ENOS? I don't, and I'm not asking anyone to believe me either.
4) Pure conjecture.
5) While presentation style leaves me wanting, the lack of any comments regarding the partnership after milestone 4 is not surprising at all. If they are discussing extending the relationship, it's possible that the subject can't be broached.
6) Differentiation is arbitrary. The surgeon workstation is specifically designed to extend the professional life of a surgeon, as to how they may be able to perform surgery. Instead of standing over a patient, and manually manipulating instruments.
ENOS appears to be more comfortable than placing your face between the cheeks of an elephant. IMO. Smile. If anyone has seen another RAS device use a similar configuration please let us know. Otherwise it would appear to be a less desirable design from which to place a surgeons head. Further to the point of differentiation, John Deere, Ford and Chevy didn't do much product differentiation until much later than their initial products. I'd conclude if it does what it's supposed to do, with as much surgeon input pre prototype, then it will work. If it didn't - then I don't think we would have seen the most recent video from Dr. Estape. The RAS daVinci surgeon with more than +7000 procedures.
I'm ok with "please buy me." But only for a good price as compared to many references in the current company presentation. I conclude we're worth more than those references. JMO.
If anyone else has corporate/medical/anything other than mortgage or vehicle lease negotiation experience - let's hear your opinion(s) as to how you would do this.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Reply 133198 RobL,
I don't follow what you're trying to formulate with the analysis of the agreement. It doesn't make sense to me. Most of what's in there is boiler plate for this type of partnership. IMO.
You're analysis appears to be making assumptions that this agreement and loan are in the final steps before a BO. While there's been a little speculation as such, there's been more speculation that it's an intermediate step.
This is a courtship. These 2 companies are dating for a while a.k.a development agreement.
This multi-step development agreement would require MDT to have change of control? Based on the possibility of default of a $1.5M loan? You funny!
Not having an early payoff provision is more telling. MDT wants a lot of time to review and look over this company. Which is really why there's no early payoff terms. The fact that Titan was agreeable to the loan payoff terms is very telling too. They were willing to let MDT poke around all they wanted, AND with the MDT BOD guest. Those are the real provisions that are really out of place in THIS development agreement.....
We already know there's no right of first refusal. And there shouldn't be one either. IMO. Why would Titan permit a right of first refusal? This is Titan saying "make an offer, and make it a good offer or too bad you lose."
Seriously? A Take-under? You're making an argument for a take-under for a $1.5M loan default? You're dreaming. TMDI had the funds to pay it off last July.
Liquidation? TMDI has $50M, with another $10 and change coming.
What ever theories you're trying to develop have no foundation based on what we know about these agreements. Further, the requirements within the development agreements don't have to be elaborate, or years in length to show value to MDT. MDT has sole discretion. And a development agreement doesn't have to contain an elaborate/itemized Scope of Work. That's the term your groping for in your 3rd point. The SOW is between TMDI and who knows??? (I'm guessing possibly Cambridge). Which is why there was a risk declaration statement from TMDI regarding 3rd party vendors and their possible participation - or not.
Frankly, your points don't make sense.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Cup,
Does the company appear to be in a better position, with better design and a library full of IP? Have you viewed the video of Dr. Estape, and Titan Living Labs? Curious to hear your thoughts.
I started in 2014 too. It's been less than brilliant, but the past 16 months have been in the right direction.
No one knows what happens b/t now and when the 4th milestone is completed. It was announced to be extended until end of this year.
I question whether it will go the full term. I have nothing to go on except that it's a possibility, and what it may do to the sp. And it's anyones guess about any new announcements before the 4th milestone is completed.
I hope you find your answers.
Good to hear from you.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
TimTeo,
That thought crossed my mind.
So I have to ask: Why would anyone feel the need to make another member, if any of the Naysayer's points are valid?
I could only guess that there's no traction in their arguments and volume would be the only alternative to create a false senses of groupthink.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Post about Vicarious?
What's that all about?
No one from this board could argue the current state of affairs regarding the performance of that company, on this board, b/c it's not relevant to this company's performance or current business activity.
Besides there's a dedicated site just for that other company.
The subject has faded quickly recently from here. Good riddance.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Reply 132975 RobLowe,
I can't figure out what your point(s) are from posting all of this drivel.
You're on the Titan Medical Inc. message board complaining about how everyone that's invested in this company is wrong. Is that your point? Hint: Waste of time. I can assure you, lending your voice to the effort to discredit the progress, and performance of this company and ENOS are really a waste of breath.
Let's keep the perspective very clear. The points that you present, if they had any effect at all, would be in an effort to reduce the value of the share price of this stock. Unless, you would like to elaborate and tell me how I'm making an incorrect assumption.
Please do tell us how your points are in support of any of the company's efforts to develop RAS devices, or enhance the performance of ENOS.
While I've learned to appreciate wisdom, am I to conclude that your efforts are to save us from ourselves?
Dr. Estape's video trumps your messages.
Good luck with your efforts. Those "very few" that would align with your opinions have not changed one investors perspective that reads, or posts to this site.
We must be getting close to the finish line, based on how many of these saviors are appearing on this investment board.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Hi Liv,
Just a point of clarification. MDT has exclusive rights to the IP that which they have licensed. It would appear that there is no limitation placed on that license, so they would keep it at the conclusion of the repayment of the loan. Part of the reasoning for exclusivity, IMO - would be so TMDI couldn't license it to another manufacturer, in a similar manner to what Microsoft did decades ago with MS-DOS. While there are redactions, I don't see anything that would lead me to think otherwise.
Regardless of MDT's exclusive license, the key is that TMDI still owns all of their intellectual property, and it goes to whomever may own TMDI in the future.
I enjoy your enthusiasm. It's hard not to get excited about our future, but it's still a ways off. Closer than where we were last year, but still unknown as to how much further to go.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
RobLowe - really?
Let's do talk about some simple facts, since your a newbie.
MDT has an established business model, that has been clearly observed and they've managed to merge, or BO 60 companies in the same manner as they are now working with TMDI.
While MDT did get 13-15 patents for $10M, they can't make a SP RAS device with only what they have. If they try it, IMO it will be at least another 5 years, and $350M with no guarantees that it will get certification and approved IP. Does MDT seem like a company that wants to be out of the SP RAS market for at least another 5 years, when they could be in it in about 2? They did license IP from a German company in the early stages of HUGO and it took many, many years for them to get a device to perform safely. I think I read it was more than 5 years? I'd argue they wouldn't have been able to get this far, unless ISRG patents expired. A distinct possibility. But, a guess none the less.
Here's some additional information that which you may not be aware. Dr. Ricardo Estape has reviewed and used ENOS, and recently performed a live porcine hysterectomy. His conclusion was the device performed as expected, with great visualization and lighting. As good as he's using at this time. He's only performed +7,000 procedures. Are you questioning his qualifications? Or his opinion? Or both? Additionally, he tested more than 10 instruments all performing as expected. He wouldn't have approved the release of the video and risk his reputation.
Where are you getting this hand controller and instrument BS?
Your opinion of the design of the controller hand pieces is surprising. Would please tell us if you've seen ENOS, been to Titan Living Labs, or if you've performed any of the known 60 procedures?
Help me with your description of irrevocable access to the IP? Don't you mean they have an exclusive license to that which they have acquired? So what? TMDI still owns ALL of the IP, and your posture that MDT has all the leverage is incorrect. You're clearly entitled to you opinion, but it doesn't mean MDT has leverage. So long as TMDI has ALL of the IP, any other company can own all of their property, and a completed ENOS.
Sure doesn't sound like MDT has all of the leverage, if any other company can own ALL of it. MDT CEO Martha hates to share, (his words) and yet TMDI is available to any other RAS global manufacturer once the 4th milestone is completed. That's the beauty of free agency. Free agency is TMDI's leverage advantage.
If anyone on this board has to tell you what's new and different about ENOS as compared to daVinci - you need to do some research. That question in, and of itself tells me why your here and how much you really know.
Frankly, I don't see MDT letting TMDI get out of the barn. It's not in their present stated business model, or the known personality of the CEO, and ENOS is done. Would you want to build something from scratch to compete against the possibility of ENOS and ISRG? Do you think MDT would welcome the fact that TMDI was a division of ISRG and have to compete against them collectively for the next 20-30 years? Or the fact that ISRG would be helping TMDI with a 5 year head start over MDT? If you say yes, then I conclude you don't understand competition, or MDT as they've stated their intentions to grow that company moving forward. And that's not leverage for MDT either.
Say what you will. I'll let the audience decide.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Vicarious is being backed by long investors....
At the present trajectory of the sp, all Beckton Dickinson would need to do is wait until this sp hits $1, and they could double their investment and practically own Vicarious.
OR...any other RAS device manufacturer.
Either way, the venture capitalists win. That's all they care about. No loyalty, just profit. And if it continues its downward trajectory, they may make money shorting it. Again, no loyalty, just profit.
If this company has a present MC of $1.25B, then TMDI is worth how much?
Either I'm wrong, or the correlation of the sp as compared to the IP is wrong.
Either way, the market will correct the incongruities. My guesses would be this sp goes down further, and the other company rises incrementally.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Nothing but blue skies on the horizon for vicarious…
Clearly - someone is NOT a Meteorologist. (Pun intended).
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
OR, good question.
I'm not an investor in that other RAS device company, but based on my observations from watching it, and many other stocks, I'd conclude that it will continue on it's present trajectory unless there is a change in perception or material conditions from which the company currently operates.
Before the merger with the SPAC, it was a high-profile development company with a few deep-pocket investors. And I'd also conclude that most of the attraction was due to the fact that the SPAC was already listed on the NYSE. Not necessarily a solid justification for my money, b/c I felt it fell into the category of a momentum investment. The small amount of awarded IP was/is the deciding factor in my mind.
It would be interesting to know how long ago any additional patent applications were filed, to see the length of time. I'd have to know that to reach any conclusion(s) if there are questions regarding the design that may be causing any delays for an award.
Clearly, my previous speculation has been confirmed by the decline in sp since the IPO. My guess was some of the venture capital was involved for quick profit pre IPO, with the plan to sell after the sp jumped soon there after. Someone's selling. I haven't been tracking the volume on the sell side, but for every sell there's been a buy. But at a lower sp. You could argue, if nothing has changed then the lower sp is a bargain. Unless it keeps going down.
The company isn't far enough along for me to consider it at this time, and the sp has too much room below where it presently sits for my liking. JMO.
This is a terrible example of how a few on this board represent themselves, or misrepresent themselves. I'd give them the benefit of the doubt, if their message(s) were few and brief. But the level of repetitive insistence of the device superiority, and specific investor participation created many doubts IMO. Again JMO.
I don't wish anyone ill will. Thankfully there's a specific board for that other company and it would appear it's fading from here.
Back to why we're here... IMO, the next 8-10 weeks may be very choppy, and how it may effect our sp. All b/c of trading volume, and those that would posture for shorting this company. Not a surprise to me.
But there is good news if you look for it. We're closer to the desired outcome than we were 1 year ago. With undisputed professional confirmation that ENOS performs as expected, from arguably THE KOL in RAS - Dr. Ricardo Esptape.
Further in support of our continued success, a few specific members speculated that we wouldn't get here, or it would be a delayed series of self-inflicted mistakes/disasters. Happy to see those predictions were pure BS. And we've established Titan Living Labs along the way.
Pretty impressive.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
dndodd it's not the steering committee.
IMO, it's the fact that the Loan still exists. Then add to that the provisions with the ridiculous collateral, and inability to pay it off early. No early payoff terms, with 100% of the company assets as collateral? Or.. how about the payoff may be executed at the end of the 4th milestone, at the earliest?
I read, negotiate, and execute contracts every day. This loan and development agreement contains unique conditions in many ways, and extreme in others. By extreme I mean, unnecessary terms, conditions and provisions for just a loan, and development agreement.
The collateral for all the company assets didn't even need to be in the terms. That's why there are instruments for performance called "Performance Bonds."
But, just to make a point.... per another so called investor that likes to insinuate that MDT has all the IP they want - then why did they require all of the assets as collateral? TMDI didn't offer them. There's no benefit to TMDI to do so. So I would conclude that MDT does find value in the entire IP portfolio. No?
I'll agree the "observer" was really a whopper. And to hear someone else say it's b/c of TMDI's management history is laughable. The Steering Committee and an Auditor could do the job perfectly. The BOD does remote meetings anyway. So the Auditor wouldn't even need to be on site either. The "observer," is another condition beyond reason for this type of partnership.
Thank you for your thoughts. I really appreciate objective thinking, and supported arguments. It's nice to hear when a few other investors are in agreement with the same conclusions as I have. Many on this Board see it. Doesn't mean I'm right. But doesn't mean I'm wrong either. JMO.
Good job to the rest of you active members that presented the MDT M&A lawyers involvement recently. Thank you.
Don't invest or sell anything based on my speculation, regardless of the possibility of any logical conclusion(s).
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
This looks very ugly at the moment.
This may be an opportunity in a few months, possibly sub-$1. Maybe?
I'll watch this with great interest, but not as an investor.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
My analogy isn't just about software.
The controllers, links and physical connections are 2 halves that are both design patents. IDC about software. To use the instruments, MDT must have the physical link patents from which to control the instruments. There's no patent description for controllers, hand controllers, or controller interface links to the instruments. Those are USPTO verified unique designs. I just don't see it.
Here's you answer regarding "Why did MDT license the IP to begin with?" This is too obvious. How could MDT assist TMDI, and keep them away from competitors at the same time? TMDI has nothing to sell - yet, and ENOS wasn't in the verifiable condition it's in presently. It's been reviewed and verified NOW. The only "things" TMDI has are IP, ENOS and R&D capability. Licenses were one of the few ways to get cash in TMDI's pockets without taking a % stake in the company, and risking it going public. Again, this would lead to the Mazor sp debacle.
The other way is to pay for development projects. Why would MDT engage little 'ol Titan to develop anything for them, if they have this monumental stable of engineering horses? Makes no sense, unless you want to pass some cash to them, b/c you're interested in them continuing as a going concern. Or they have something that you REALLY want, but it's not finished yet. Perhaps.
This is how you treat a potential business partner, that may become a division of the parent company.
It's a plausible theory that MDT may actually want to build a SP RAS device, except when they don't have all the IP they need to make it work. AND it leaves the possibility of ENOS in the hands of ISRG. And ALL the other reasons I mentioned in my previous emails about creating chaos for themselves. Sure, MDT is in the business of creating chaos for themselves, as a 5-year business plan. Giving ISRG a 5 year head start, using ENOS to extend the useful life of their existing tech, cutting the potential revenue by 50%, and competing against their own IP? Perhaps the WSJ will be praising his strategic planning, execution and vision? Nah. Don't think so.
The redactions and ridiculous provisions in the Loan are the keys.
Why would MDT require control - if they don't want ENOS? MDT wants control so TMDI can't do much while the development agreements are in play, and the loan can't be paid off before then. Otherwise - if it were "just" a Loan, there would have been an early payoff clause. Whoops! There goes control.
MDT wants ENOS further developed before the tuck-in. But... the further along the development of ENOS, the more attractive TMDI is to competitors. Tuck-in. Their language. Their MO. Their business model. You always forget about the "why" control TMDI, with those pesky Loan provisions. If it's just a development agreement, then why require a guest seat in the BOD meetings? THAT provision is completely unnecessary. That person doesn't need to be there, b/c there's already an entire Development Review Committee. Control. Again, you forget the details.
Mazor didn't have any communication limitations, and MDT nearly paid dearly for that oversight. So - what do you know? There's a communication limitation provision in the agreements. You have to remember the details, or it appears to be innocent.
You might say "So what?" about the loan provisions. Well, TMDI sure cares b/c all of their IP was put up for collateral. That would be the first thing you, or anyone else would get out from under, but SURPRISE! you can't until the 4th milestone is completed. So now the LOAN isn't really a loan. It's control for a very long time.
The agreements will extend the runway for ENOS for nearly 2 years, and added cash to the company bottom line. It's a perfect plan, without creating a sp stampede. It also gives MDT a better understanding into TMDI's Living Labs - a little more than a full year to do additional DD. Because time is the only element that can mitigate risk, and clarify assumptions when doing research. TLL is a critical component to the future of ENOS, and ENOS descendants.
I get the part where you don't want to believe the possibilities. Regardless of how well they fit. What I don't get is why? If I'm right we all win BIG.
You're arguing against winning BIG. That's a completely new contrarian strategy they don't teach in B-School.
I'll leave my thoughts, answers, explanations, and your arguments for the audience to decide.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
More to this than you'll admit.
You do know that the controller interface is proprietary too, right?
The entire system is a proprietary linked series of electro-mechanical sub-assemblies.
Just b/c you have the instrument license doesn't mean you can just slap on any old controller. Those components have to match, to communicate and control the operation of the end effectors. That's a design patent too. Both halves.
Not seeing anything about a Surgeon Console component, hand controller, or controller link as a licensed patent description. This may be an issue for your theory. The vague nature of the licenses cuts both ways. You and I see it differently.
I'll take a different tack.
I'll admit, $10M for what they have is a steal. But, do they have all they need to make a SP? In less than 5 years? If I'm correct the answer is absolutely NO.
Let me argue a different point about your theory regarding MDT's reluctance to own TMDI. Would ANY competitor want to let a turn-key ENOS loose in the marketplace, with a 5 year lead?
Would ANY competitor welcome the thought of having TMDI and another global medical device company as a competitor too? Don't think they do.
Let me argue another different point about your theory regarding MDT's reluctance to own TMDI. What about the +$20 billion revenue from the next 25 years? MDT can't participate for at least another 5 years. But ISRG, or another global medical device company does? MDT won't be able to participate and capture an entirely new market? Or capture some of ISRG's customers, AND lets ISRG protect their existing customer base and establish new customers with ENOS?
Say that out loud to yourself. Please.
In one decision they give up a 5 year lead in a new market, don't get exclusivity, lose 50% of the revenue, divide the market, establish another formidable competitor - with a new LARGE revenue stream, and fight against their own tech? And declare to the world that it was their PLAN and INTENT to create all of this chaos for themselves?
Really? That's your theory? I don't see it, and I don't think Martha's reputation and ego will either.
Here's another thought. ISRG can transact 6M new shares at the current market price and it will only dilute their outstanding shares by about 5%. And of that $6B, will be able to recover that cost in approximately 7-8 years (best guess) based on sp appreciation, and additional net new revenue. $6B is peanuts, especially if they can keep from obsoleting their existing systems sooner than if MDT had an exclusive ability to launch ENOS within the next 2 years. And all that juicy IP for the next 20-30 years. Knowing Martha is stewing over it the whole time?
And you think it's a good idea if MDT works for another +5 years, while ISRG runs rampant?
The audience will come to their own conclusions. But, I don't see it.
JMO.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
I used small words.
If you're a surgeon, Dr. Estape's review is overwhelmingly obvious.
To most, it's the definitive professional opinion. I guess it's more difficult to comprehend if you don't actually use the device.
I'll let the audience decide.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Dr. Estape's comments,
The video, and orator is the evidence that which you complain doesn't exist. He's driven the current licensed device +7,000 times, saving and extending patient lives. He's featured in the current Investor Presentation as "The" RAS surgical professional opinion/reference addressing Pre-clinical Validation. From your own purported professional experience, I would think you know what that means. No?
IMO, this video is THE evidence. Its proof of a completely functional, new RAS device design, validated by the expertise and authority of the USPTO. This RAS surgical device has been validated by arguably the pre-eminent Oncological RAS surgeon in the US. Clearly, the video was edited to limit the information that he could have shared regarding ENOS performance. And is intended to be complimentary because the video exists with a purpose. It provides proof of concept, design, performance and successful application in the targeted industry, and market segment.
If the video doesn't contain all of the subject matter, at the level you deem necessary to reach a compliment - please contact TMDI. I'm sure they will edit the video to meet your standards. We won't hold our breath while waiting for those changes. Please feel free to consider this option, as it will likely enhance your position of influence. IMO.
Mark 45 sec. - Professional credentials, experience and specific procedure expertise. +7,000 cases and more as the Assistant Surgeon.
Mark 1:02 - Evaluated +10 different types of surgical instruments
Mark 1:15 - Evaluated camera, visual acuity - as good as he uses today. All of which is a summary, as a complement about the performance of this new device, as it's been awarded by USPTO.
A "successful" procedure requires the entire system to perform exactly as intended. And it did. The camera provides the visual input so the surgeon can manipulate the hand controllers that facilitates the actions required of the instruments to perform each individual step, in sequence, to complete the procedure. THE ENTIRE SYSTEM.
The USPTO has approved the unique characteristics of ENOS nearly 100 times, so far.
ISRG is going to love this new RAS medical device, and all of the defensible IP it brings to the RAS marketplace. If you think MDT is that foolish to let ISRG have a shot at owning it, and the +$20B in future revenue. Should that be the actual outcome, it may not make the Top 5 on the B-School Strategic Blunders List, but it would make the Top 10. Because those schools would be reviewing it over the course of 20-30 years.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Dr. Estape's comments,
The video, and orator is the evidence that which you complain doesn't exist. He's driven the current licensed device +7,000 times, saving and extending patient lives. He's featured in the current Investor Presentation as "The" RAS surgical professional opinion/reference addressing Pre-clinical Validation. From your own purported professional experience, I would think you know what that means. No?
IMO, this video is THE evidence. Its proof of a completely functional, new RAS device design, validated by the expertise and authority of the USPTO. This RAS surgical device has been validated by arguably the pre-eminent Oncological RAS surgeon in the US. Clearly, the video was edited to limit the information that he could have shared regarding ENOS performance. And is intended to be complimentary because the video exists with a purpose. It provides proof of concept, design, performance and successful for application in the targeted industry, and market segment.
If the video doesn't contain all of the subject matter, at the level you deem necessary to reach a compliment - please contact TMDI. I'm sure they will edit the video to meet your standards. We won't hold our breath while waiting for those changes. Please consider this option, as it will likely enhance your position of influence. IMO.
Mark 45 sec. - Professional credentials, experience and specific procedure expertise. +7,000 cases and more as the Assistant Surgeon.
Mark 1:02 - Evaluated +10 different types of surgical instruments
Mark 1:15 - Evaluated camera, visual acuity - as good as he uses today. All of which is a summary, as a complement about the performance of this new device, as it's been awarded by USPTO.
A "successful" procedure requires the entire system to perform exactly as intended. And it did. The camera provides the visual input so the surgeon can manipulate the hand controllers that facilitates the actions required of the instruments to perform each individual step, in sequence, to complete the procedure. THE ENTIRE SYSTEM.
The USPTO has approved the unique characteristics of ENOS nearly 100 times, so far.
ISRG is going to love this new RAS medical device, and all of the defensible IP it brings to the RAS marketplace. If you think MDT is that foolish to let ISRG have a shot at owning it, and the +$20B in future revenue. Should that be the actual outcome, it may not make the Top 5 on the B-School Strategic Blunders List, but it would make the Top 10. Because those schools would be reviewing it over the course of 20-30 years.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Beast. I want to be right.
But, that doesn't mean that I am.
I can only speculate, with reason, and what makes sense, based on what those documents say, how they say it, and try to formulate some coherent thoughts as to why they're composed the way they are.
I've done a lot of speculating. Sometimes after I've looked over the details, my conclusions surprise me.
If it's one thing I've learned, reality is stranger than fiction. There will be more bs, and strange happenings beyond what anyone can predict.
The redactions may not reveal themselves for us to really know the "what, when and why's."
Regardless, we hope for the best - which is a BIG FAT BO.
Don't buy or sell anything based on what I say, or what think.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Liv.
Easy there tiger.
Belicheck is playing the long game. He's concerned for the next couple of years, but developing his offense for the next 4-6 years, based on the length of contracts. And he doesn't get to choose the length of term, only to work with what he has.
He just didn't wring the last bit of greatness out of Brady, and good for Brady too. It's his reputation that's out there every year. Great leaders make everyone around them better.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Pharmoney, Its possible.
It wouldn't be the first time a manufacturer bought a competitor that makes the same type of product. Right?
The only issue would be the perception of conditions to form a monopoly, or restraint of trade.
The main reason may not be that ISRG would want to sell ENOS, it's the fact that owning that IP, further protects ISRG's existing design by not making it as obsolete as quickly. As compared to MDT launching ENOS and carving wide swaths into new markets, and ISRG customers.
It may also create a lot of damage by keeping it from MDT. Serious damage to future potential revenue streams, and considerable delays entering the space with a SP, and possibly NOTES.
There may be enough incentive from those 2 conditions for ISRG to consider it.
Just food for thought.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Reply 132227 Sport.
I'd fathom a guess that you're out of your depth. Pun intended.
There's nothing unlawful by establishing a development agreement with tangential conditions identical to what TMDI and MDT are about to finish. The key is one's ability to recognize them, for that which is their true intent. Which is why there is a specific stipulation in the agreements, as it would apply to the MTD guest in attendance during BOD meetings, that permits them to be excused for specific actions as they would apply to conversations about competitors or attorney-client privilege.
So long as there is no restraint of trade, limitations on inter-state commerce, or any action that would trigger the Sherman or Clayton Antitrust acts, it can happen.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Hey I'm invested HERE!
I base my decisions on what I know, and how that applies to my experiences.
If a different RAS device company had as much IP as TMDI, and a known commodity like ENOS, with positive references from arguably the world's foremost authority on robot surgery - I'd be invested there instead.
I looked at the potential of the design early in development. Sure I saw chicken cutlets. But I also saw real potential based on the supposition that if TMDI could make THAT, it could be made a lot better. My only flaw was the amount of time and money it took to get this far. Not sorry.
Sure, I understand tech - I was in IT for a good while. I know how to extrapolate. I actually worked on a lot of very cool computers (Onyx, NeXT/Apple, VAX, IBM) back in the day. I recognize unique design, and capabilities when I see it. But, IDK doodly about how an RAS surgical robot should feel, or any subtle nuances regarding the control, or dexterity. All those "things" that make the device great - instead of just ok.
That's recognizing potential and formulating an objective assessment, not pure emotion.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Hi Liv.
Will anything definitive, like the finality of a BO occur at the time of the 4 milestone, or shortly thereafter? Only if another global company makes a formal entry, or creates a different development agreement, or a separate BO.
I don't think MDT pulls the trigger while on its own timeline. Something would have to happen to push that timeline forward. Which is possible b/c once the Loan is paid we can go work with another global medical device company - if we so choose. That will drive MDT bat-sh!t crazy.
The amount of time it takes to process the amount of due diligence necessary for a proper review/evaluation is much longer than many think. Definitely more than a year. Now, anyone can put the golden handcuffs on TMDI for that period of time, but I'd make it REAL EXPENSIVE. MDT's mistake was not offering enough money to keep TMDI off the game board for a longer period of time. However, Mc may have limited the time of exclusion away from the open market. Kudos to him, if he did. If that was the plan, then MDT's next move will be to extend keeping TMDI off the open market. And Mc gets another opportunity to get a lot more cash for the privilege of keeping TMDI away from competitors.
That's why I think MDT's in negotiation with TMDI to keep it off of the game board. Time is the only factor that can further mitigate risk, with additional research into the target asset/company.
Good question.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
I'm not qualified to answer IP differentiation.
I'll have to rely on Dr. Estape's positive reviews and opinions. If they were less than positive - I'll assume you would too.
I don't use RAS robots. I just can't answer you with technical certainty.
My expertise is in contracts, content, competition, negotiation and execution of agreements. My job is to understand the intent, and explain the issues and limitations as they're written.
The fact that TMDI's been awarded and filed nearly 200 patents - based on unique design, performance and capability leads me to conclude that their IP has plenty of differentiation. I can only rely on the USPTO for that expertise.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
Hmmm, I don't see it frankly.
I don't see where there's any indication that MDT is developing a SP robot from the development agreements. That's totally contrary to think that Titan would be developing a competitors robot. And MDT has stated innumerous times that they hate sharing market space, and customer revenue from the same market segment. They're not going to increase that probability by their own actions. They're already sharing IP from this joint-venture. Doesn't sound like they intend to let TMDI out of the pasture.
$350M is a lot less than $6B-$10B, but it's not just for ENOS. If ISRG gets TMDI, MDT can kiss their future in RAS robotic surgery goodbye. Everything except what they've licensed will need to be researched, designed, developed, tested, built, modified, patent processed, and tested again. 5 years is a full business cycle, and this SP build will take more time than that. There's an absolute cost of playing keep-away.
Does Hugo look like it can address NOTES? ENOS does, with some augmentation in size and reach.
You don't consider competing against TMDI and another global company, and ISRG as a mistake? 1 decision creates double the competition? That does not make any strategic sense.
Titan's commercial launch is early '24. If MDT started today, their's wouldn't be available until nearly '28, or '29 - if ever. That's one of the risk element(s) missing in all of your possibilities.
MDT is here with a purpose beyond a simple development agreement. MDT put restrictive conditions and provisions to keep TMDI away from other competitors. Why? That doesn't sound like MDT is planning on building anything on their own. All of their known actions are creating barriers and access to the open market regarding TMDI's capabilities, and assets. That's not the behavior of a typical development agreement. It duplicates their behavior seen +60 times previously, when they do acquire another company. That's "stay off my lawn" behavior.
You keep discounting, or forgetting Martha's statements about tuck-in acquisitions. He has said NOTHING about growing MDT's business organically. His words. None of his statements include anything that sounds remotely like "license agreement(s)." Again, his words - he hates sharing. It's kind of a key element in the psychological makeup of the CEO of the largest medical device company in the world, with a spending jones.
MDT's actions are leading me to my conclusions, and none of them say they're going to make their own SP, or NOTES robot. IMO.
I'll let the audience decide for themselves. No one should invest or sell anything based on my opinions.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
My estimate is a range.
$6B-$10B. It has to be a range b/c there is still a lot of unknown, and IP development in process.
The cost of keeping the IP from ISRG, and the ability to eliminate the risk of developing their own SP, and jumping ahead +5 years on the development calendar is worth additional billions - beyond the ability to generate +$20B over the next 25 years, after launch. Not to mention the cross-application of the IP for both MP and SP devices. It's a Chef salad, not just iceberg.
To throw a fixed amount as an estimate would be much less a possibility.
Regards,BK.
My assumption.
The license agreement is separate from the development agreements. The development agreements have a provision for sharing any IP that is created during the projects.
I think my assessment of the IP license is accurate. 12-15, which is 33% of the IP at the time of the executed agreements. Would you pay for IP that which has not been already approved? Me neither. Some of those IP applications have taken years to process and approve.
Regards,BK.