Share
4,660 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 568
clock Created with Sketch. 20/09/22
13:59
Share
Originally posted by whirlswirl:
↑
Definitely agree that we are in a net better position for the current products MX1 is bringing to market. In the investor call this morning, Peter Rowland also mentioned that the multi-emitters integrated into any future imaging products by Varex would require the MX1 generator, as it is optimized for use with NEX technology. This would open up an additional revenue stream to produce components for products MX1 has no current plans in developing. This seems like a smart alignment of objectives, let another company invest 3+ years into designing products that use multi-emitters, and when they do, MX1 will benefit from this through the sale of generators (in a sense this is very much like receiving royalty payments as the generator itself can be a high margin product in its own right).The sense that we are "giving away" the option to enter the market with multi-emitters is founded on some real concern though, as who knows how big the market will be for multi-emitter applications. The vast majority of the breakthrough technology critical in the initial Graphical User Interfaces for personal computers like the Mac wasn't designed by Apple, Apple bought the IP from companies that didn't know how good of a thing they had. Peter Rowland did state however (summarising here obviously) that the engineers have thought about and concluded that the use of multi-emitters in the current 4 business areas wouldn't provide any advantage over using a single emitter. So I think we're safe in that regard, and my initial worries about competition are likely misguided.
Expand
in the apple example you gave it was xerox whose technology people says taken over by microsoft and apple both .... (many documents on google on this topic).
