I'd have to look into microcap biotechs to give a proper answer...

I'd have to look into microcap biotechs to give a proper answer on which ones have revenues that justify their MC. I would think few, if any, as they need plenty of money just to keep the doors open, for research and development, weathering the setbacks of regulatory storms and poor test results and making wrong corporate turns, before they see success.

But this is precisely the reason I chose to go into OSX. Sure, they're a microcap, but different from many other biotech microcaps, in that they had already been around for twenty years, done the research, developed the products, got the permissions, had great results from operations, etc. I wrongly assumed they could capitalise on all of this to produce a fast increase of revenue, aided by new products, great additions to the board, strong partnerships, etc.

A quick glance at the share price history of successful biotechs reveals that many years of patience is required. There are many large ones (e.g Resmed) that started as microcaps, probably had low revenue for a long time and took years to take off (but never traded lower than their listing price). I would think OSX products will find success one day. My issue is the the time it will take. That's not a complaint against the board, products or sales teams. As I mentioned, the issue is that doctors are not using the products, therefore hospitals are not buying them in sufficient quantities to seriously up the revenue and move the share price.

I had hopes of a fast increase in revenue and based my decision to buy on that. It was wrong. To paraphrase Shakespeare, the problem lies not with the company but with my expectations. I think OSX faces many years – as most biotechs have – before the kind of results I was thinking of, and that's just too long for me. For someone else who's happy to keep it in the bottom drawer and wait, I'm sure they'll see a good return.