Ann: Alcidion EGM Results of Meeting, page-23

Product and sales

What plans are in place to strategically monitor and independently evaluate the performance, impact and value/cost effectiveness of MIYA products? (As per clinical trial data on Patientrack, ROI, etc)

Company will be exploring potential opportunities for independent clinical trials of its Miya platform and etc. The proof is in the pudding as it would be hard to sell a value proposition if you cannot backed that up via independent research.

Based on customer feedback to date, who well do the company’s products and services address customer needs and meet their expectations – e.g. we have yet to identify the sweet spot between upfront and recurring costs? If you are aware of any issues, what is the company doing to overcome those issues to keep the customers engaged – e.g. delivering new value added solutions and/or extending incentives for customer loyalty?

Company has received very positive feedback from customers in respect to their products. Recent presentations in NZ to showcase the integrated Patientrack-Miya platform also received positive feedback in respect to the ease of use, ability and etc to enhance productivity, inform decision-making and, ultimately, improved patient outcomes.

As of yet, there is no optimal “sweet spot” between upfront and recurring service and maintenance cost. From the company’s perspective, their preference is not to have an upfront sugar hit but rather have an annuity-style arrangement. However, this ultimately is largely dictate by the customer and their budgeting constraints. For example, some customers are incentivised to spend the bulk of their budgets as any unspent monies cannot be rolled over to the following year. They either spend it or lose it to other priorities.

Management will continue to focus on offering customers (whether current or potential) a compelling value proposition. Our key competitive advantage is the interoperability of the Miya platform and its ability to integrate other complementary systems.

Based on your knowledge of the past and current efforts to promote our products, what are the major barriers to the sale of our products? Are there clear differences between the public and private hospitals and between geographical locations? If you are aware of the barriers, what is the company doing to overcome these barriers and adjust its strategy better as a whole?

I believe this has largely been covered in my previous posts. The key impediments are:

- Our relatively small scale
- Lack of proven track record
- Lack of established relationships
- Lack of integrated product offering
- Risk adverse procurement process of our customers

The acquisition of MKM Health has been strategically undertaken to overcome those impediments. Management will continue to leverage off the core capabilities and expertise of MKM Health and vice versa.

What is the typical time-lag for the conversion of potential sales into actual sales? Are there significant differences between the different sectors and geographical locations? What can the company do to minimise the time-lag and offer a more compelling expenditure proposition?

It varies but private hospitals tend to move faster than the public hospitals for obvious reasons.

To date, the shortest conversion time is around 8 months. Even the MidCentral DHB contract took around 2.5 years to negotiate and execute.

At the end of the day, Alcidion is focusing on matters that it can influence and control – e.g meeting with key stakeholders, continuing to innovate and offer a more compelling value proposition, influencing policy makers and etc.
NZ and UK appear to be ahead of having a coherent digital health strategy and willingness to adopt new technologies. Australia is very risk adverse and tend to be a follower rather than a leader.