Nah, absolutely, objective negative comments good. No one wants...

Nah, absolutely, objective negative comments good. No one wants a echo chamber of confirmation bias.

Neither of us have accurate described time to positive cash flows ('an eon' vs 'not far away').

If we believe them the recent multiple medical distribution businesses purchased are currently responsible for ~40%-45% of OSX' total sales globally and that should allow it to move to positive cash flow and profitability sooner. Being more vertically integrated is inarguably going to allow them to both control the expansion of, and costs associated with, their sales growth. Selling direct to customers instead of via distributors has to deliver improved margins, delivery speed, etc.

He won't put a date on it but Mark Leong:

“This sets us on an accelerated path towards positive cash flows,”

With respect, quite a contrast to the dictionary definition of an eon; "an indefinite and very long period of time".

I do think OSX should have concentrated on core markets for sales to keep its costs down. But conversely, if its recent revenue growth rates continue now its EU medical device registration done, and the distribution acquisition does indeed help in reign in costs, I'd call it 3-4 years if it resumes growth like it displayed Q1 CY22 - Q3 CY22, across all of its now wide sales network:



OSX is a $12 million mkt cap company. The market does not need to see positive cash flows, just the possibility of, via very consistently growing revenues and the suggestion it can become a freestanding business in the near term, for it to come off that very low base.

I am not naive. I missed the $0.20 IPO, and was never paying the $0.60+ prices it traded on listing, but OSX has been one loosely on my radar since then. It made over $1+ highs in 2019 I recall. A bit silly. But similarly, these lows are getting a bit silly despite all of the disappointing inertia/stop-start pattern in sales the company has shown to date.