Perhaps this post to come under the ‘umbrella’ of the brainstorming thread.
We can be pretty well assured that P&G is ‘running’ with the tech/IP of Obj, so much so that it is to be incorporated into many other of its existing products.
Reviews so far seem great and if followed up on the entire range should bode well for revenue figures for both companies although more so for P&G.
P&Gs goal, I imagine, is not only to maintain market share but increase it and perhaps in this case directly attribute it to Obj tech.
This is what it may come down to; can Obj prosper on this alone?
Revenue is touted to go from a trickle to a ‘flood’, I have no doubt that revenue in the next several quarters will certainly rise, of concern is: one; how quickly and two; sustainably of maintaining that level once it reaches its peak.
Unless Obj is receiving revenue from sales of the creams WITHOUT the wand then it will be RELYING on the sale of the wand.
This brings me to the relevance of the LIFE SPAN OF THE WAND, is anybody seeing the significance of this point!
The consensus maybe one year (?), one poster, from their personal knowledge, I think, suggested much longer than that, couple this with the fact that consumers will often use past its use by date then ‘How does this impact the bottom line of Obj?
Even with recurring sales, (bearing in mind this could be a year plus later) when revenue goes from a trickle to a flood to a more moderate stream after the initial ‘flush’ of sales, will the moderate stream of revenue be enough to justify the market cap and more importantly increase market cap?
From one review: “SK 11 Magnetic Eye Care Kit: BFFS forever”, “On a postive note, the Magnetic Wand can be used over and over again without any expiry”, the only minus in the review was the initial cost, imo, women will still purchase regardless.
Unless Obj receiving royalties on cream sales without the wand then WILL Obj be compensated by ‘milestone’ payments for the success of its tech.
If not, bearing in mind that royalties will be received on the wand only and then there after when replaced one year or later what level of sustainability of revenue do sophisticated investors need to see to before ‘they’ buy in?
Food for thought, that’s my insight, not saying it is correct, happy to be corrected or shown where I have may have misunderstood something.
Expand
(20min delay)