Back

Latest Forum Topics / QT Vascular

Post Reply

QT Vascular Going BIG Post Reply Rate topic
Sunstar Senior	05-May-2015 02:14        Sunstar About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Qt markets its catheters under 2 brands Glider & Chocolate. Chocolate is its flagship. Under the chocolate brand, there are 2 types. Chocolate PTA (peripheral) and Chocolate PTCA (coronary). Chocolate PTCA first received its FDA in jun 2014, and subsequently got its second FDA for gen 2 (improved version) of the Chocolate PTCA 2 weeks ago April 2015. To build on its current chocolate-like balloon technology, they added drug coating and called it Chocolate Touch. Generic term for such drug coated balloons is DCB. Drug Coated Chocolate (DCC)   I believe is their in house terminology to include Chocolate Touch PTCA & Chocolate Touch PTA. Chocolate Touch is currently pending CE approval since its submission in july 2014 as per company announcement. Think this should help clarify    Kyoto2008      ( Date: 04-May-2015 21:07) Posted: " CE mark approval in 2H15 for its drug coated chocolate (DCC), the Chocolate Touch (PTA), and for the Chocolate Touch (PTCA) to undergo its first human study in 2Q15" Not sure what this DCC is all about, any enlightenment? Just saw it, and it looks interesting.  Biosensors had a patent that could earn them revenues without producing any volumes.    If QT is innovative, this could be a strength.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Kyoto2008 Elite	04-May-2015 21:07        Kyoto2008 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	" CE mark approval in 2H15 for its drug coated chocolate (DCC), the Chocolate Touch (PTA), and for the Chocolate Touch (PTCA) to undergo its first human study in 2Q15" Not sure what this DCC is all about, any enlightenment? Just saw it, and it looks interesting.  Biosensors had a patent that could earn them revenues without producing any volumes.    If QT is innovative, this could be a strength.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
vivivava Veteran	04-May-2015 09:34        vivivava About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	STOCK IMPACT &bull Most litigation expenses likely in 1Q15. We believe most of the litigation costs have been incurred and should have minimal drag on 2Q15 results. Discovery and deposition, which is the initial process for preparing for a legal trial, will contribute to the majority of the litigation expenses and likely have been expensed in the earlier periods or in 1Q15. &bull Business as usual. We think the litigation will hardly put QTVC off track as neither the group&rsquo s operations nor its products will be affected. Driven by the increase in market penetration and expanding distribution channels in Asia, Europe and the US, we estimate a 3-year sales CAGR of 62% to US$55.8m by 2017. In addition, we estimate QTVC will manage Chocolate PTA sales of 42,600 units and this will contribute to 57% of 2015 revenue. In addition, there is room for Chocolate PTA unit sales growth once the medical device gains approval from the China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA) in China and the Shonin in Japan. &bull Still achieving milestones. We note that QTVC has constantly achieved the milestones set out in its IPO prospectus in 2014 and is often been ahead of time in doing so. We do not expect the litigation process to delay any of its upcoming milestones. Investors can look forward to a set of new milestone that has been established in 2015, such as to achieve the CE mark approval in 2H15 for its drug coated chocolate (DCC), the Chocolate Touch (PTA), and for the Chocolate Touch (PTCA) to undergo its first human study in 2Q15. &bull Oversold on litigation announcement and share overhang concerns. We think it is untimely that the announcement coincides with the one-year moratorium that QTVC has in place and that the share price weakness yesterday has been exacerbated by expectations of potential overhang from the expiry of the share moratorium on pre-IPO investors. &bull Assuming: a) strategic investors (including Johnson & Johnson Development Corporation.) holding on to their QTVC stakes, b) 50% of pre-IPO investors have sold down post first round of moratorium, and c) the majority of the 30m shares transacted on 29 April came from pre-IPO investors, we estimate non-strategic pre-IPO investors would have around 98.5m shares, representing only 12.8% of QTVC&rsquo s total outstanding shares. &bull Buying opportunity. We think the sell-down is a buying opportunity as the group is on track to meet its milestones and on the way to meet another year of strong sales growth. Hence, we maintain our investment thesis.    UOBKH
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
vivivava Veteran	04-May-2015 09:29        vivivava About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	http://research.uobkayhian.com/content_download.jsp?id=28057& h=ea4a443e06d41e745b22a06c25aff7ab For those interested souls
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
FairView Member	04-May-2015 09:14        FairView About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	UOB KH posted an optimistic report with TP$0.60 ... DYODD KepoChicken      ( Date: 04-May-2015 08:19) Posted: this stock nowadays... cant attract much attention from BB liao johnng      ( Date: 04-May-2015 07:49) Posted: Kateks want it below 20cents....better avoid
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
KepoChicken Master	04-May-2015 08:19        KepoChicken About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	this stock nowadays... cant attract much attention from BB liao johnng      ( Date: 04-May-2015 07:49) Posted: Kateks want it below 20cents....better avoid
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
johnng Supreme	04-May-2015 07:49        johnng About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Kateks want it below 20cents....better avoid
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Sunstar Senior	04-May-2015 07:34        Sunstar About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Qt just announced clarification to its litigation case after its AGM last Thursday. Says Angioscore has no case against QT. no financial impact to qt and qt unlikely to lose patent
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
luca_brasi Member	03-May-2015 16:49        luca_brasi About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Shares Buy-Back Mandate was approved during the AGM held on April 30th. It is with immediate effect and can' t exceed 10% of the total issues shares till the next AGM. http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Results_of_AGM.ashx?App=Announcement& FileID=347702
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
luca_brasi Member	30-Apr-2015 19:32        luca_brasi About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Maybe just a technical rebound, let' s see next week. sharenewbie0301      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 17:13) Posted: bbs accumulating in midst of panic selling?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
sharenewbie0301 Veteran	30-Apr-2015 17:13        sharenewbie0301 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	bbs accumulating in midst of panic selling?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
vivivava Veteran	30-Apr-2015 14:35        vivivava About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	good point
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
luca_brasi Member	30-Apr-2015 10:22        luca_brasi About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	So the party suing is a deeper loss making co and has recently taken on a $230M USD long term debt as per their balance sheet: http://www.spectranetics.com/investor-relations/fundamentals/ Wonder who is desperatly trying to shoot a competitor...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
luca_brasi Member	30-Apr-2015 10:16        luca_brasi About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Spectranetics  management continues to project revenue in the range of  $258 million to $265 million, an increase of 26% to 29% over 2014, but is guiding to the low end of the range. The revision reflects the potential impact of DCB products recently launched by competitors on the U.S. AngioSculpt business   Net loss for 2015 is projected to be within a range of  $78.0 million to $82.0 million, or  $1.84 to $1.93  per share, compared with  $58.0 million to $62.0 million, or  $1.36 to $1.46  previously provided. The increased net loss consists of approximately  $14 million  of incremental spending associated with the Stellarex program and  $6 million  of increased costs related to litigation with  TriReme Medical, Inc.   height00      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 07:58) Posted:       Firstly non profitable company Secondly awaiting patent approval in september Thirdly legal suit again founder       Kyoto2008      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 02:08) Posted: I' ve read all the pages.    Nothing is conclusive. Chocolate is very similar to Angioscore' s product Angiosculpt, so I think it will be difficult to prove otherwise unless QT CEO can prove that Chocolate is totally different, but it' s described as very very simillar, using nitinol on the tip of the balloon.    Plus QT CEO was a director in Angioscore when chocolate was developed, I think this is the tricky part. Half half QT CEO will lose his case and have to pay what ever money he made to Angioscore.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
height00 Veteran	30-Apr-2015 10:03        height00 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Someonr here keep promoting from 50cts till now 22cts up to one to believe height00      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 09:37) Posted: Better get out than sorry later vivivava      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 08:50) Posted: On the money here Sunstar.   Plus Spectranectics bgt Sterralex a DCB product from Corvides for just US 30m.   Corvides already had a DCB approved by FDA back in Nov 2014 and they sold their other DCB product to Spectranectics for just 30m.Stellarex has already gotten CE Mark approval, probably working on FDA now.   So why not drive a truck to block the QT' s path? So Angioscore aka Spectranectics has every incentives to throw a spanner into the DCB game just like a divorce couple in your analogy below
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
height00 Veteran	30-Apr-2015 09:37        height00 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Better get out than sorry later vivivava      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 08:50) Posted: On the money here Sunstar.   Plus Spectranectics bgt Sterralex a DCB product from Corvides for just US 30m.   Corvides already had a DCB approved by FDA back in Nov 2014 and they sold their other DCB product to Spectranectics for just 30m.Stellarex has already gotten CE Mark approval, probably working on FDA now.   So why not drive a truck to block the QT' s path? So Angioscore aka Spectranectics has every incentives to throw a spanner into the DCB game just like a divorce couple in your analogy below Sunstar      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 00:40) Posted: I beg to differ here about your take on ptca. Stents were developed to so called replace balloons in vascular procedures. But problem with stents is that it stays in your artery and blockages again form around the stents again. When this happen, doctors have no way to remove the imbedded stents and bypass become the next high risk option. What qt has done is to improve on existing balloons technology using chocolate like balloons that inflate uniformly around the vessel without causing tissue damage. Biosensor has no fda approval to date unlike qt. fda approvals is crucial to entering big market in USA. I am no legal expert here but it appear the litigation seem like a case of sour grapes. Dr eitan is a co-founder of angioscore which was subsequently taken over by spectranetics for 230m. As an inventor, he moved on to developed a new balloon product. Now angioscore seem to be crying foul that the patent should belong to them? It' s like after a divorce, you became rich and your ex wife is suing for half your assets again. Like I said , I am no legal expert, but this case doesn' t seem to hold ground to me.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
vivivava Veteran	30-Apr-2015 08:50        vivivava About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	On the money here Sunstar.   Plus Spectranectics bgt Sterralex a DCB product from Corvides for just US 30m.   Corvides already had a DCB approved by FDA back in Nov 2014 and they sold their other DCB product to Spectranectics for just 30m.Stellarex has already gotten CE Mark approval, probably working on FDA now.   So why not drive a truck to block the QT' s path? So Angioscore aka Spectranectics has every incentives to throw a spanner into the DCB game just like a divorce couple in your analogy below Sunstar      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 00:40) Posted: I beg to differ here about your take on ptca. Stents were developed to so called replace balloons in vascular procedures. But problem with stents is that it stays in your artery and blockages again form around the stents again. When this happen, doctors have no way to remove the imbedded stents and bypass become the next high risk option. What qt has done is to improve on existing balloons technology using chocolate like balloons that inflate uniformly around the vessel without causing tissue damage. Biosensor has no fda approval to date unlike qt. fda approvals is crucial to entering big market in USA. I am no legal expert here but it appear the litigation seem like a case of sour grapes. Dr eitan is a co-founder of angioscore which was subsequently taken over by spectranetics for 230m. As an inventor, he moved on to developed a new balloon product. Now angioscore seem to be crying foul that the patent should belong to them? It' s like after a divorce, you became rich and your ex wife is suing for half your assets again. Like I said , I am no legal expert, but this case doesn' t seem to hold ground to me.   Kyoto2008      ( Date: 29-Apr-2015 22:42) Posted: This co need an angel investor, who believes there was no copy done and it can be proven. The financials have not gone to green yet, I' ve always said PTCA is a damn old technology, and practically every other co has one of these ballooning catheters.  Maybe chocolate is a little gentler on the legs, but the volume' s in the coronaries.    The sexy story on adding drugs to the cathether to differentiate and to charge a premium, this remains a story until FDA approval is obtained. Let' s call a spade a spade.    No financials, we don know if he did copy, so what' s the positive about this co?        Leave Biosensor out as they have a patent that is churning money for them without producing a single catheter, something QT does not possess. Not vested.  But I' ve said before and will say it again.    PTCA is a volume game, and QT don have it.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
height00 Veteran	30-Apr-2015 07:58        height00 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Firstly non profitable company Secondly awaiting patent approval in september Thirdly legal suit again founder       Kyoto2008      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 02:08) Posted: I' ve read all the pages.    Nothing is conclusive. Chocolate is very similar to Angioscore' s product Angiosculpt, so I think it will be difficult to prove otherwise unless QT CEO can prove that Chocolate is totally different, but it' s described as very very simillar, using nitinol on the tip of the balloon.    Plus QT CEO was a director in Angioscore when chocolate was developed, I think this is the tricky part. Half half QT CEO will lose his case and have to pay what ever money he made to Angioscore.  luca_brasi      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 01:16) Posted: You can look at one of the latest pre-trial pleading published here:  http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/4:2012cv03393/256625/591 35 pages and in summary it really sounds like what bro Sunstar is saying: QT CEO moved on to develop a better product with his own company, AngioScore now trying to shoot a competitor. Cheaper to go to court than spending R& D...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Kyoto2008 Elite	30-Apr-2015 02:08        Kyoto2008 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I' ve read all the pages.    Nothing is conclusive. Chocolate is very similar to Angioscore' s product Angiosculpt, so I think it will be difficult to prove otherwise unless QT CEO can prove that Chocolate is totally different, but it' s described as very very simillar, using nitinol on the tip of the balloon.    Plus QT CEO was a director in Angioscore when chocolate was developed, I think this is the tricky part. Half half QT CEO will lose his case and have to pay what ever money he made to Angioscore.  luca_brasi      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 01:16) Posted: You can look at one of the latest pre-trial pleading published here:  http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/4:2012cv03393/256625/591 35 pages and in summary it really sounds like what bro Sunstar is saying: QT CEO moved on to develop a better product with his own company, AngioScore now trying to shoot a competitor. Cheaper to go to court than spending R& D...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Kyoto2008 Elite	30-Apr-2015 02:00        Kyoto2008 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I went back to read your statement.  Stents are still used today, and in conjunction with ballooning.    Balloon first to open the clogged artery, then put in the stent to ensure the artery remains open.    Cannot imagine a balloon doing the work of a stent.  That' s why I made the statement that you' re trying to bluff.    I' ve seen the design of chocolate, no way it can do the job of a stent, I know the QT chappie said this, but it' s really marketing talk. Kyoto2008      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 01:52) Posted: The facts have to be right.    Investors can easily be misled by what you said.        Hence I made the statement you are trying to pull wool over investors eyes. And I still think you are trying to do so. Nothing personal, I am not a shareholder, neither do I intend to be.  I am not shorting either.    Facts: 1.  Biosensors has patents that they collect royalties on.    QT does not receive royalties on any of their patents.      2.  QT is losing money.      Whereas Biosensors has a Net Profit of 40mln for 2014. Which one do you disagree with?     Sunstar      ( Date: 30-Apr-2015 01:29) Posted: Neither did I say chocolate balloons will replace stents. I am just correcting your statement that its old technology. I am explaining why stents were developed to overcome short comings of old balloon technology. And qt went back to basics to overcome old short comings. Plse take constructive comments like a gentleman instead of accusing of pulling wool over investors eyes. If you are becoming personal in your comments, I suggest you join another thread. We are talking about the impact of the litigation here.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me

                                                         First   < Newer   1301-1320 of 2353   Older>   Last