It's certainly not ideal, but after the recent numbers and news...

It's certainly not ideal, but after the recent numbers and news (e.g. reimbursement) boosting certainty in regard to both the near and longer-term outlook, it is pretty easy to sit comfortably whilst the price does what every it decides to do. Eventually the price will move to where it ought to be, and the wait will be worth it IMO.

Another thing worth remembering for EYE is that we are coming from a very low base in a massive market. They don't even need to grow market share beyond the single digits to generate enormous sales growth. They just need to get a miniscule proportion of the overall glaucoma treatment market, 99% of doctors can use other treatment methods, 1% (of the c. $7bn USD p.a. glaucoma treatment market) is more than enough to give shareholders multi multi-bag returns. However, the biggest topic at these ophthalmology conferences seems to be "Interventional glaucoma management" which refers to earlier intervention using MIGS as opposed to drops and more advanced surgical options. Of course, insurers don't like this because they don't like to spend money, but the doctors don't care what they think and seem to be rapidly embracing this view of switching ineffective drops and risky surgical options for MIGS. iTrack Advance in my view best fits this view of interventional glaucoma management, as it is the only device that does not leave behind a stent or cause any tearing. Completely natural response, something that will appeal greatly to newly diagnosed patients. Not to mention a very strong track record, with well under 100k procedures under its belt and some of the longest term safety/efficacy data. With the recent 30% increase in reimbursement for iTrack Advance, I think that even the insurers are beginning to realise how great of a device it is as well!