Can everybody post on IV? Yahoo won't let me respond to hofno's message on how to get to old format. Do we need this? Does it cost for newbies to post on IV? Please respond and let's consider moving this board
cars, I would not expect an announcement in the CF presentation unless CTSO releases a PR prior to the presentation with the guidance about sales. Legally, Chan cannot tell one group important info without making it a public statement.
Let's see. Since the loans are "interest only" to start off with, when would you like to start including the principle payments? Since we are looking into the future, there will undoubtedly be dividend payments one day, so why don't we go ahead and include those in the current cash breakeven analysis? Try not to be so obvious with your agenda.
My guess is that REFRESH Phase II doesn't start until 2017. That's a pretty solid prediction based on the number of deadlines that have slipped in the past.
The increase in manufacturing costs is accounted for in the margin. The 38% of revenue that doesn't become gross profit is the cost of goods sold. Yes, costs will increase, but Dr. Chan has been pretty tight-fisted with the money.
I agree that "lumpiness" is still an issue, but sales should be approaching the point where that lumpiness gets evened out. I don't know of any small company that provides the details on revenue source that you wish for. Your 2017 may be more realistic than my 4Q16.
On Dec. 31st, the company had $7.5 million in cash and short term equivalents. That total fell $1.5 million to about $6.0 million as of Mar. 31. So, if the marginal rate is 62%, then the increase in top line revenue needed for cash breakeven is $2.5 million. Revenue in the first quarter was $1.6 million; quarterly revenues need to be $4.1 million for cash breakeven.
2nd Qtr, 2016 estimated revenue--$2.1 million (includes only the early days of Fresenius partnership)
3rd Qtr, 2016 estimated revenue--$3.1 million (Fresenius should be in full-swing)
4th Qtr, 2016 est'd rev $4.5 million (Fresenius plus Russia plus Middle East)
******Litigation on the interference and interaction horizon and probable Bead recall...very risky for a one product company!******
Does that sentence have a verb? What does "interference and interaction horizon" mean? Does it have anything to do with CytoSorb? I hate to say this but I am afraid Pears has some deterioration in his communication abilities.
*****we would finally garner Definitive Infectious Disease Antiobiotic
Thresh holds for Sepsis and other ID Oriented complications.*****
I wish someone would tell me WTH that means.
****Patients who meet the clinical criteria for septic shock, are in multiple organ failure and who have elevated levels of endotoxin in the blood, as measured by the Company's FDA cleared Endotoxin Activity Assay (EAA™), would be eligible for the treatment*****
Is that another way of saying "Patients who are practically dead already would be eligible for treatment"?
The company vested 7,000 of Dr. Chan's options at $8.07 per share. The following footnote appears on the Form 4:
"On April 8, 2015, the reporting person was granted an option to purchase 70,000 shares of common stock, which was to vest upon the satisfaction of certain performance criteria for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2015. The Board of Directors of CytoSorbents Corporation determined that 10% of such performance criteria was achieved during 2015, resulting in the vesting of 7,000 shares underlying this option."
Quote to follow is from a consulting web site. Essentially, the bottom line of Small Business Technology Transfer is that the government wants private companies to develop technology and commercialize it. The government will provide some funds to nudge things along. It's a real affirmation for CTSO to receive a Phase I grant of $150,000. It shows the company is getting respect from the government that is resulting is real dollars.
"The SBIR/SBTTR program is designed to stimulate innovative research by small businesses while providing government agencies with new, cost-effective solutions to technical and scientific problems. Over $1 billion in SBIR funds and over $100 million in Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) funds are available each year to qualifying companies, making these the largest pool of seed-stage R&D money available. Only companies organized for profit may propose. Qualifications include employer of 500 or fewer, independent of large company control, predominantly U.S. owned and willing to perform project work in the U.S.
The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program is a highly competitive program that encourages domestic small businesses to engage in Federal Research/Research and Development that has the potential for commercialization. Through a competitive awards-based program, SBIR & SBTTR enables small businesses to explore their technological potential and provides the incentive to profit from its commercialization. By including qualified small businesses in the nation’s R&D arena, high-tech innovation is stimulated and the United States gains entrepreneurial spirit as it meets its specific research and development needs.
By the way, The Blood Connection web site is a source of some of this info.
As you can discern from the above numbers, not every plasma transfusion requires a universal donor. Type O people would have no problem finding a plasma donor if there were any plasma available at all. Similarly, Type A people can receive plasma from almost half of the population. Thus when we try to figure the available market for our developing technology, it will NOT be all plasma donations.
However, Types B and AB can receive plasma from only 18% of people. Although there are not terribly many Type B and AB people, you can see the problems that might develop.
I suspect that in a large city hospital, these plasma types are readily available, except possibly in times of blood shortage (think Orlando recently). However, in remote places, or rural areas, or perhaps military hospitals near battle zones, it’s easy to imagine that the “plasma needs” and the “plasma donors” get out of whack not infrequently.
Up steps HemoDefend!
There is so much we need to know! How does HemoDefend work? What is in plasma that HemoDefend needs to eliminate? What is the market for this technology? How will HemoDefend be tested? How long will this take? Is there a partner out there who would like to license this technology from CTSO and commercialize it?
There are many things to complain about CTSO as far as an investment goes. One thing, however, that continues to amaze me is the new, unforeseen applications of the technology. The use of CytoSorb in heart surgery, for example, plus the usefulness in liver disease. [See important comment at the end of this post.}
The most recent pleasant surprise has been the possible development of HemoDefend (beads in a bag that clean undesirable components from stored blood) as an agent to create universal plasma.
Most of us are probably more familiar with the “rules” of (whole) blood transfusion. My father is O neg and his blood can be transfused to any blood type. Parenthetically, he has been a lifelong blood donor racking up something like 16 gallons of donated blood.
The rules of plasma transfusion are different from those of whole blood transfusion. With plasma, positive and negative (which refers to rH factor) are irrelevant. Ergo, type A plasma is type A—no neg and pos.
So this is a list of the prevalence of different blood types.
In plasma donation, AB+ and AB- are universal donors. Everybody can receive AB blood. As you can see above, AB people only make up 4% (3.4 + .6) of the population.
Here are the plasma transfusion “rules.”
O (44%) can receive O, A, B, and AB (100%)
A (42%) can receive A, AB (46%)
B (10%) can receive B, AB (14%)
AB (4%) can receive AB (4%)
[Important comment! There is much more to say about this subject. If somebody responds to this post, Yahoo MAY allow me to post again. Yahoo is really careful about allowing too much substance on these message boards.]
Bert[ha], let’s use 95,000 as the number of severe sepsis cases treated in the ICU ‘s of France and Poland. This is Fresenius’ territory and ergo, an indirect sales territory for CTSO.
Let’s calculate market penetration of 1%, 5%, 10% and 25%.
Let’s assume the bottom end of the range mentioned by Dr. Chan, or $3,000 per patient. I am open to correction on this, but I am going to divide the top-line revenue into $1,000 for cost of goods sold, $1,000 to distributor Fresenius, and $1,000 to CTSO’s gross profit.
So, at the various market penetrations, we have these numbers flowing to the gross profit line.
Once again, we see that a very conservative market penetration of 10% by a very large, very active distributor (Fresenius) would take CTSO close to breakeven. And that is in France and Poland only.
cow, I count 7 digits as 1,000,000 to 9,999,999. I enjoy reading your posts and appreciate your contributions to this board.