AGM Video, page-21

The so called WP "solution to funding" ?(yep it's them "instos" going to save the show again?!)...and all the hype (like what's changed?)

With respect to @jaygatsby 's responses, not much...as usual a barrage of emotive allegations.

They overlook this:

AHZ is at a more mature stage of development. We've hived off the expensive drag, which is Immunologies.

Adapt is at an early stage of it's market cycle, 2 years or so is not long to be on the commercial market.
Increased sales of Adapt is going to drive profitability. That's already increasing.

Adapt is now in 20,000 patients and now we have a higher profile. Before then we couldn't get traction in marketing or a marketing partner but now we have a lot of doctors using it as part of the profile. Reps are outnumbered 6-1 by competitors of comparable size, but hugely outnumbered by bigger competitors.

What's going to change the higher profile is medical publications which are coming out. Our calcification data is hugely important and unique. NOBODY else has that! We have publication coming out in the most prestigious publication in the valve space. This is expected to have an effect.
Major competitors are saying they're as good as us now, which means we've been noticed and are seen as a threat.

3-D EU approval was 12 months later than expected, apparently due to Brexit as the relevant head of approvals was in England. This means not enough revenue coming out of Europe. So this is in line with what has been said in here by @suzuki42and others *

3D products and TAVR are the big growth sector, responsible for much greater revenue opportunities. Durability is the big quality of our technology and I've mentioned this in posts repeatedly.

Being located in Australia is not sound operationally and Minneapolis US is the epicentre for medical devices. This explains the shorter term costs associated with building up a presence and focus in the US. But it explains how we were able to progress the TAVR development so rapidly.

I'd suggest @bilbo35 @Dazaau @ Lexcorp and others have a closer listen to what is being said at the AGM and try to depersonalise your situations if you can. It's easy to sling off and make facetious remarks.

IMO AHZ is going to be able to make a more clear business case to future partners and investors.

(I was slower to look at the AGM due to other priorities, and going on guesswork about the causes re US/EU but WP confirms that Health systems in the US are indeed challenging to work with - just as I suspected!. Bigger companies can offer discounts we cannot, so up against cost vs quality. Just as I suspected...the best results for the patient is not necessarily paramount. So you don't get the uptake you were logically expecting would flow from having the best technology and durability).