Repy 120919 Shorts..., You are correct from my perspective. I'd say the license agreement and the $18M raise was calculated for Titan operations, new US office, US engineers, additional R&D and additional work on ENOS. If I was planning these steps, I'd have the end game identified and the revenue either in hand, pending, or clearly delineated - with contingencies. Never have a plan A without a plan B. With as much distaste as there was displayed for a R/S, and Mc with a 51% approval rating - I'd speculate that the operating revenue has been firmly established, way past August 2021. Otherwise it would not have been prudent to establish as a U.S. based operation. Which is all confirmed by the length of the U.S.lease(s), the subsequent immediate expansion, and the soon-to-be expiration of the Canadian lease. I'd say the writing is on the wall for Mc to bring value to the plan before the next shareholders meeting. That's very good news for us. It's a solid, clearly defined date certain event.
I'm guessing the milestone payments were based/calculated on multiple sequential quote(s) from Cambridge to do the work MDT was proposing. Cambridge does all of the mfg. work from what I can tell. At least that's how I would have structured it, with a large additional percentage (cushion) factored in. That's not to say some of the work on ENOS won't continue at the same time. My hope is some of the MDT milestone development will also be incorporated into ENOS, so that work will be a "two-for," both for MDT and Titan. I just don't know.
While I value Mc and he has his name on a few patents.... Dr. Genova can carry the water. I think there's a place for Mc with MDT, b/c HUGO is not an elegant design and what ever resources are in-house at MDT are clearly all-in on HUGO. I have no idea if MDT has done any work on a SP, but what $150B company wouldn't have a 5 year plan? But if those are the same people that designed HUGO - then Titan would be my solution to move MDT forward quickly. And the IP must be compelling enough that MDT feels it's defensible against ISRG. Can you imagine the level of DD done on our IP? HUGO would scare the sh!t out of me if I was Martha. After seeing HUGO, truthfully I'd go for 2 ENOS. Hmmm?
This is all speculation on my part. It fits, but I may be wrong. Until someone can tell us the depth of what's in the milestones, and more importantly what details are in the loan and license agreements it's all IMO. There was language to increase the loan agreement, so I'm guessing that there are escalator clauses in the license agreement for newly minted IP. Hard to believe MDT would license design(s)/IP that are not approved by the U.S. Patent Office.
If anyone is wondering how Titan generates revenue going forward just look at the IP. IP is a 20 year moat. Reread FaceTrains emails about his experiences with IP and how it effects competition. I'm sure a lot of the IP will transition to the endoluminal version of ENOS, which one could argue would be additional leverage when calculating the value at the time of BO. I find the combination of Titan and MDT very compelling.
Sorry, the reply is long-winded. It's more than you asked for. I look at this little company from a lot of different angles, and the product, R&D and timing with MDT just fits.
Good luck to all. Regards,BK.
