Flatlander schreef op 30 augustus 2021 21:38:
Wow Mr, Blues you are really living up to your name singing the Blues loudly today. One really has to question why you would continue to hang around and post given that you no longer have a financial stake. You are correct, I'm sitting on a large loss with my BCART position. I've made no secret that thus far, BCART is one of my worst investments. However, if you go back and read my posts I've always maintained that BCART is a highly speculative position. I have managed the position size so it was never more than a couple % of my overall portfolio. As far as being in marketing or sales for a diagnostics consulting company, I can assure you that I do not work in the MDx field. I try to be balanced and not a shill for BCART as witnessed by my outburst a couple weeks ago regarding the ML2 shutdown during a large pickup in the demand for Idylla products. Welcoming new people to the board is simply a means of trying to make someone feel comfortable to post and contribute (whether it is pro or con BCART).
I know you believe that PCR is no longer a relavant technology. Yet many labs continue to have large areas dedicated to PCR. Sanger, pyrosequensing ... still garner a significant number of analyses. Furthermore, emerging markets are likely to be dependent on PCR for the forseeable future. I believe based on publications from a multitude of users that there is synergistic relationship where Idylla can be used in conjuction with NGS. For example, MSK pointed out that Idylla is not prone to false positives, so they use the EGFR results to initiate early treatment on patients that test positive for certain EGFR mutations. This allows them to forgo the NGS testing costs on this segment of the tested population. So they system can be used to initiate faster treatment/prescription uptake and can reduce overall testing costs in this segment of the population.
The reality is disruptive innovation can have long stangnant periods. I've previously used Tesla as an example of this. However, there are many examples. Amazon was founded in 1994 went public in 1997 and produced miniscule SP gains in the first 10 years of public trading, I instead believe it is more productive to reassess my initial investment thesis and critically dissect whether my assumptions still hold or accept if factors have changed in a manner that no longer makes success possible. Hint - I have not made that determination on BCART.
The MDx marketting consultants that you speak of indicate that the Oncology segment is projected to grow at 20% annually, Furthermore, no one platform has a dominant market position. BCART just grew cartridge sales for the 1st half of 2021 at 96% so they are establishing/taking market share at a respectable clip. The platform is well suited for pandemic conditions. It has long shelf life, is available on demand, does not require much space or hands on time from technicians, This makes the system well suited for labs trying to socially distance or meet oncology testing demands on top of a high Covid testing load. There is a reason that University of Naples increased their use of Idylla in the last year relative to NGS, I suspect Credit Suisse sees the same factors as a reason to establish a position.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC... The reality is disruptive innovation can have long stangnant periods. Personally, I can accept the fact that I'm sitting on BCART position losses. I don't think I could accept realizing the loss by selling out and then have the company go on a multi year run. As I have said before, I beleive this can turn quickly with a few registration approvals and leveraging partner (BMS, AZN, etc) field sales staff to ramp Idylla sales.
MB, Good Luck with your future investments.
FL