The problem for this company is that they have devised a clever technology that is looking for an application. Let’s say the technology alerts you to the fact that an elderly resident or your youngster has wet their nappy. What will you do about it? Change it right away? Well, that’s not the way things work. Modern diapers are designed to cope with multiple wettings. Nursing staff have protocols they must follow so that each resident gets their allocation of pads (say 3 per day) and no more.
And what if you receive an alert at 1am that your baby has wet itself? Will you change the diaper then, or leave until a feed or in the morning? The point is that we do what is practical not what the technology tells us. BTW most quality diapers have wetness indicators on them that performs an adequate job of advising when a diaper
needs to be changed. Or for kids there is always the “tests” that we have all done.
When SVA launched their, admittedly earlier, technology their platform was that this will reduce the amount by of diapers used in a nursing home by 30%. And also the cost. Continence is the third largest cost in a nursing home behind staff and food - and there is a limit to how
much cost savings you can make there. A number of care homes greeted this with open arms, here was a significant cost saving they could make on their terribly tight budgets.
Naturally the multinationals who sell such diapers were cautious in case the promise could be fulfilled and they would lose 30% of revenue. That is why they virtually all took positions to either align with SVA, or develop their own technology as a covering position. They pretty quickly recognised there was “nothing to see here” and so they extricated themselves from their agreements or haven’t pursued their own technology with vigour. Otherwise wouldn’t a multi-billion Euro company have their technology in place by now?
Over years product trials have proven exactly what I said above. Nursing homes put the technology in place, but the saving bags didn’t materialise. The problem is that a me may know how often or how much urine someone passes but both diaper technology and protocol/practice runs counter to how the technology.
Over the years SVA has been a “darling of the biotechs” when that was a thing. They achieved government awards for innovation and attracted financing of various types. But the key thing you need to be successful is sales! Revenues have been minuscule in comparison to invested capital - and that is what has kept this
company afloat. Agreements have been announced and then wilted. To achieve revenues you need a product that delivers meaningful benefits to customers. There is no doubt this technology works. It’s just that it doesn’t address a market need.
if you are wondering why I have bothered to write all this (I am not and have not been a holder), it is in response to people investing their hard earned capital and thinking “now maybe this person can turn things around”. I struggle to see how anyone can make this technology meaningful to customers - but then again I could be wrong.
IMHO DYOR
