Well after the SHL fiasco it’s going to take some seriously...

Well after the SHL fiasco it’s going to take some seriously positive outcomes to restore my trust.

Now I realise we don’t know what was happening behind the scenes, or who was to blame, or what went wrong. But at this stage I am going to stick with them (though to be honest it’s not like I have a huge position. Now it’s even less huge, hahaha….)

Still, management have made some clear statements which I will use to judge going forward.

”hundreds of thousands not millions” so they should have enough money to execute. At this stage, at current outgoings, there’s still a solid chance they will need to raise again before EOFY.

”months not years” well that’s the real trick isn’t it? Can they get on with it and start earning revenue sooner rather than later? A reminder that outgoings are $10m/yr. I’m going to wave my hands and assume total cost of manufacture/ distribution is ~30-40%. Then they need to pull $15m revenue a year. Let’s say $20m to be comfortable. That’s 40,000 tests a year, or 10,000 a quarter.

One of the more promising aspects of the presentation is that they don’t seem to be pushing a megarollout and are looking at a more incremental approach. Let’s see if they pull that off.

I understand the argument put by some here that there is a question of where P-D fits in the clinical pathway. But: if it was totally useless, surely it wouldn’t have gotten reimbursement. And for a sizeable chunk of change, much more than I was expecting. I remember reading an article somewhere (sorry not very useful that I can’t cite it for you) complaining that the American healthcare system spends way too much on testing. While the products and the company story are very different, in a sense PIQ is a little bit like TLX: you’re betting on the craziness of the US health system.

Let’s see if the comoany can finally get its act together and make some income.