Isn't it obvious to everyone that they used that graph because sales are yet to really take off? So why would they provide a graph of sales when we're yet to really reach that phase and the current aim is all about getting centres to try our product? If foxtel launched in India with a deal where people could trial foxtel in their homes for 3 months for free and then decide if they want to pay for it, it would be ridiculous to expect foxtel to put up a graph showing whether there had been an increase in paying customers in India after 1 month. If they did, it would be disappointing, and people would have a whinge and demand to see a graph showing how many people had taken up the 3 month free offer. It's the same general principle in this case.
This is my interpretation of the graph (both the information in the graph itself, and the fact that this was the graph they used): There hasn't been a sudden explosion in sales. We aren't being hit with orders from hundreds of centres for tens of thousands of patches. The switchboards aren't lighting up with calls from doctors around the world who have had nothing better to do for the last 5 years than impatiently hammer the refresh button in their browser on the Admedus website to see if the patches are ready. Doctors aren't hoarding them in their garages in preparation for the apocalypse. I know it would be nice if that had been the case, but we were never ever led to expect it would be. Even the broker reports reflected a realistic uptake rate. And the first step towards this realistic uptake rate is getting centres to try the product. And guess what - they are! Faster than expected! There's even a graph that shows how quickly, and it's pretty impressive!
Once these centres decide to start buying these things in bulk, we'll get a graph showing the exponential rise in sales.
Can we please just drop it now?
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
