Hi ddxx, I agree with you; 'the market loves...

Hi ddxx, I agree with you; 'the market loves speculativeness'....'sounds boring but just waiting for J&J and market penetration.

In my opinion PIQ probably shouldn't be considered as a speculative stock in the same ilk as some of the 'cancer cure' companies (i.e. a single drug, will it or won't it work, either a 100bagger or bust). I believe PIQ will have a slow and steady rise without a large boom off the back of any single announcement. The company itself is multifaceted and for me the ongoing analytical services revenue is reassuring in its own right. The science behind the predictive utility of Promarker-D i think is sound, the issue will be around uptake.

My main concern is around PIQs business model. I'm not sure simply out-licensing the test to pathology providers and relying on royalties is enough. There needs to be demand for the test.. There are several ways demand will increase, I'm not sure the extent to which PIQ can influence any of them; recognition of its utility in officially endorsed screening and management guidelines (ie as part of a health check or Diabetes management plan) or as part of the criteria to prescribe a publicly subsidised drug ( such as a SGLT 2 inhibitor), or as a mandated risk management strategy for private health insurers (because it will cost less than going on dialysis). I think the incorporation into guidelines will take a while but will rely solely on published trial evidence in the main. The relationship with a renal drug (as in the J & J link) will only be in the pharmaceutical companies interest if it helps them sell more drugs through a new or wider indication (ie in people without CKD (yet)), PIQ would therefore be riding along on the coat tails of the company if it needs pro marker D to expand its own indication (The australian government subsides (via the PBS) many drugs that require blood test results as part of their indications). I don't really know about the tactics of private health insurers, but I would presume this is not an unlikely scenario , particularly in the US.

Longer term, what I find more exciting is the endometriosis and Guardia diagnostics. These are subtly different from Promarker D in that they would be targeting symptomatic patients as diagnostic tests rather than predictive. ( which means patients knocking at the door motivated to get answers and treatments)

anyway I have been holding here for a couple of years now, convinced by the science, just hoping the commercial side of things gains some traction