Sentiment shifting here, I was very encouraged by the conference call and the confident nature TK discussed the results, the complexities, the outcomes and what can only be described and commercialisation in full steam ahead mode. There was no fluff, not backing down, nor what could be referred to as pump statements, it was clinical, factual and straight forward.
I would have handled the release of information and the contributing statement whilst still in suspension, it's astute to allow the market to comprehend all information first before coming out of halt. This essentially was the cause of the sell off, which by all intensive purposes was less than 6% of the register and the clear buying volume today, is the opportunity most traders have been waiting for.
Given the real news flow and shift into a commercial mindset, it's clear there is a huge growth potential here, how much more do we know, how much more has been achieved, how much clearer is the road ahead?
I would suggest that we are in the middle of the most significant pivot in the life cycle of the company. It was also encouraging to see some major brokers on the call, asking questions, as they are likely seeing this as an opportunity to buy, especially given the questions were around risk mitigation for regulatory approvals and time lines in line with the cash position.
The company is confident in the results to date, have some concurrent trials that are imminent and it's showing it's cards that they are concentrating on regulatory approvals and commercialisation into 2019.
This isn't investment advice, I also am very critical of how the management are mishandling information flow, this is purely an opinion on where I see the company in it's current position. I was fortunate enough to have built my position on the back of last year's results, and yes I have sold parcels at highs, this is a marketplace after all.
To suggest the application doesn't work, warrants little merit, to suggest that it's a revolution in it's current application is also a reach, the subjectivity of the nature of the respiratory diagnosis is complex and the percentages that have been achieved in double blind, highly complex trials in 2 very different clinical environments (Australia and USA) is nothing short of astonishing.
It's clear that diagnostic subjectivity is real and the application is not meant to define a diagnosis, but assist in making the subjectivity less prevalent, with an amazing objective outcome that is continually being improved, with a goal of mitigating both the costs and time to diagnosis to patients, clinicians and institutions, which are probably the two biggest barriers to effective treatment pathways.
