CEO promising A truly global and fully integrated Co. sounded like a plan to merge with R-Tech! Not so, he then explains. R-Tech numbers for amitiza have been stellar... +70% or so for years: but that was in yen and also price increases on top. So much so that R-Tech has now a 66ish% margin, Abbott/Takeda probably the same and Sucampo now 50ish%. Add to those the contract manufacturer. See-through margin on all this is likely to be the "normal" 95% or so. Look out then for generics attack! R-Tech sales are down a lot but this is due to the change of prostone supplier - they keep the 8-9% growth annually. Analysts have a hard time reconciling low US scrip growth with higher royalty payments, but passed-on price increases are likely the cause. In future, increases will be only due the scrips. ie modest? Still, at least we do not hear the inventory excuse like at Ironwood. DTC and other co-marketing is profitless growth... but then again that's the Ironwood story.Makes sense if the patients stick on the scrips afterwards of course.
New pricing deal with R-tech shows Greenleaf is in control of Sucampo, so at least a start.
Priced at 11. Cash was used for a seemingly useful acquisition, although buying one's distri channel is not normally something to applaud. De-risks the skin market a lot though. The CAd market is finally coming back. Which only leaves breast IORT as the problem child. That' s the no. 1 attention grabber... and the usual long play. No question now that they have the cash to wait it out. At 3x sales this is a nice valuation. If it looks like they can get organic growth to settle at 20%+ with profitability then a double from here: or a near 10-fold return of the nadir!
Exactly. Losing a million instrument revenue off of 1.5 m budget is plain silly. Coming after 7-8 years in charge of sales or marketing at Nanosphere + over a year as CEO, one might think Garrity has a plan that works. But not yet.
Clouding the real metrics of the business is no service to retail investors... even if the strings are pulled by Lurie and Aspire who likely know the real data. Most investors don't expect profits now or even soon... but do expect dilution at ever higher stock prices, and that requires trust in the numbers and a competent CEO and head of sales.
Director traded (bought) some 10 days before close of quarter. So, should not be a bad one! Sonacare has Misonix's former HIFU device up for FDA panel in Oct. Although a different panel shot Edap down, it might be because they prefer this one! Not the technology, but the IFU.... CEO Klein has some respect due to Xoft...
If panel says yes, Misonix will eventually get the rest of the 5 m owed on the sale.... Earlier they also had the rights to manufacture the Sonablate, although not mentioned lately. Something to tell on the CC?
approx 6month 2014 numbers given for Biofire - 150 - are likely to be "sales"... the usual way, bought or leased or packaged.... and maybe in use. For Nanosphere, they give customer placements, which equate, they say, to 300 processors over same period. Placements seem to be contract placements, more like pre-sales. More useful to know would be customers ordering tests for routine use for the first time!
Still, at least they now gave consumable sales which were 2.2 m. If the 50K per customer is mixed with the 3.5 instruments per customer - and assuming minimal resp and gram neg test sales - that implies they have 150 units in "full-time equivalent use" TOTAL.
Interestingly, the recorded sales of instruments in q2 2014 and 2013 were 0.5 m vs 0.8 m. Placements were almost the same... so go figure the price/units/placement?
Small margins is the real issue here... not growth per se. Their margins are 40% which is generic oem-level. Yet they sell mostly now foresight and direct in the usa and their margins on the equipment should be 60 and the probes 80....
Before Elite margins were worse! I doubt the old Somanetics has a blended margin of less than 70%.
Much more informative talk than usually given! At the end describes Monovisc launch. He says exceeded his expectations and sales past 5m mark (must be end-user of course). Emphasizes no loss of GROWTH in orthovisc sales, contrary to his own expectations. As we have read, JJ is trying to get synergies from Synthes, and explains Sherwoods claim that inventory changes there explain slower growth in sales vs market share. Also he says Mitek carry no monovisc inventory.... docs want cash collection proven before ordering and it goes down the chain. Latter comments support my view that inv build at anika tells us nothing much yet, inventory has to be held somewhere, after a certain point - I assume it is now more at Anika than before. If the monovisc talk is true, getting the specific CMS code in Nov is key for 2015 expectations. Then again, a sceptic would say that only then will monovisc eat at orthovisc growth!
With the real estate deal off the table (asking price is anymore marginally above book value) for now, one has to look elsewhere... The services businesses are no longer bleeding the company dry, but the leverage is in the Culex. As revenues have declined and as the shares warrants and option come into play the equity value of the company means it is no longer dirt cheap.
How time flies... taking from their investor presi in May: backlog was "this good" in 2005.... lower actually... 9 years ago. Stock price was 120 dollars... each share... post-split of course!
Revenues were then 15.7 m and declining. Now we are at 7 with numbers not declining.
So what's up? Since we are now given un-audited numbers, we can't be sure how backlog is re-calculated: but the issue for the stock price to move is turning that into sales. I suspect the sales don't move because the CROs now sit in-between and add/delete the backlog without projects actually getting into real trials?
Interestingly little analysis in the past 2 weeks or so! One observer thinks Oracle was just getting at Salesforce. Moshe has been touting the Sales force angle lately. SO, good news there.... all new biz that might have gone to TOA will likely now be directed to Click. Given the lack of news Oracle maybe did not pay such a bundle for TOA, but a fair amount if the the fund that put in 66 m recently had to be enticed to sell out so soon... 300 m or so?
A 1 m dollar quarterly increase in backlog is ok, if it's a serious trend. After all it is 20% growth annualized. But a corresponding 100k increase in sales is not ok. Neglecting the lead times, it does look like 10% conversion of the delta....
Investors like to see a stock offering for growth, not just w/c and salaries: so good move here. Also, sellers took mostly stock.... another good sign, though de-risked at these prices. Also aq is very closely related, not a green-field aq like Xoft was!
New study out from NCI... says that 37 m women are screened, CAD costs 5 extra, a cost which has declined 50%... but the market is 33.1% converted to CAD. All info seemingly 2009. So the enduser market is 61 million of which hologix has "80%" Leaving 12 m or so for provider with iCAD solution..iCAD's share being rather small.Overall, going digital has not helped says study.... at least 2D (2009).
Overall, the per-capita cost for screening mammography and 2 years of follow-up increased by 47.4% ($76 to $112, P
Long list from FDA, most I guess from the transfer. Clearly, FDA thinks Staar's QA was not up to the job. Only point 15 is interesting or disturbing as it relates to an approval... or then the sheer number of issues is the problem. Heartware has a 5-point list a month ago and filed with SEC. Staar did not ... will be interesting to hear why. Quality in the clinical trial was the reason we do not have toric in the USA of course.
Since what happens outside the US is more meaningful to the bottom line, this is better news business-wise than the FDA ok. Shame the FDA didn't seek fit to approve the toric in q2...How many boxed warnings can they fit on an ICL...
...for the service industry in this latest PR. "Business decision-optimization" from a conceptual point of view is a huge market vs. it's segment mobile workforce management. Not that the mobile workforce market battle has been won yet...!
So, it is not IF, it is HOW ultra-fast insulin will affect Novo's market, and what will Novo do about it! Not only ultra-fast, but no needle and no pen... hmm. Still, Novo can keep its smokers' market.
Afrezza only cost some 2,5 billion, given Novo's 2B a year R&D spend money is not the issue, but time is. 7-10 year out of a market is.