Sano, I'll take one more wack at this although we've been through it many times. Your argument seems to be that IMGG is not a company that can spin up and start producing 500 machines a year. I totally agree. I've been to their facility, seen it, and it ain't happenin'. The thought process doesn't stop there however. As I've been pointing out, this is fundamentally an IP play. I have asked Mike before why, if this thing is so great, doesn't a Siemans, GE or Toshiba just plunk down $300 million right now and buy 'em. Mike's explanation has been that the major OEMs don't generally do their own R/D any more...they buy IP and bring it to market themselves; it's more cost effective for them to let others put the sweat and tears in and fail nine times out of ten. On the one in ten that works and has a market then they just buy 'em. It's a whole lot easier. Why not do so before FDA approval? Because they have a BOD and shareholders to explain themselves to and the surest way to cover one's ass over a transaction is to already have Federal certification completed. Does it cost them many multiples more to do it this way? Yes, but it's relative. What they, using their established market shares and economies of scale, can make on the product is many multiples again larger than either what they pay for it or what the IP company can make on it themselves if they try to go it alone.
This is Mike's explanation. One buys it or they don't but I will say that it conforms with generally observable data; I am unaware of purchases of BB companies with unapproved IP whereas it happens regularly with small companies that have passed through the FDA hoops. So, arguments over what IMGG can produce themselves are moot, only the misinformed here are under that impression. It comes down to how much credence one gives to the argument that Dean's IP is disruptive, scalable over a large market, and worth it not only to an OEM's bottom line but also to keeping out of their competitor's hands. On this point there can justifiably be difference of opinion and I have not seen the argument yet that can resolve this point with any degree of certainty. Calling it "doublespeak" is not an argument.
So therein lies the uncertainty with this company and to argue this point either way with certitude is just so much talk out of one's arse.
AI
