Pinned straw:
Insider Buying at IPD
When the new board took over at IPD, they mentioned in their first meeting that they would buy stock once the blackout period was over. True to their word, all board members have either bought or held onto their existing shares.
As @Metis pointed out, Janelle Delaney has made a significant purchase, accumulating 300K worth of IPD stock over the past couple of months.
However, the shareholdings of the remaining directors are relatively low:
Ms. Christine Emmanuel-Donnelly
Mr. Andrew John Grant IPD holding: 27.6k shares (tenure: 6 months)
Mr. McGregor Grant IPD holding: 191k shares (held before the board split)
Dr. Parmjot Bains IPD holding: 2k shares
While it's positive to see the board purchasing stock as stated, I consider some of the holdings a pretty low conviction stake.
@Metis I appreciate your professional insights into the Sozo product. As an outsider looking in, it seems to have a clear use case - replacing subjective measurements with accurate ones using an easy-to-use device seems like a no-brainer.
So yes, I share your bias that adopting the Sozo platform is a good idea, resulting in better outcomes for patients, starting with Lymphedema and with opportunities to expand its use case.
However, where I have a big question mark is in the long-term adoption and implementation of the product and system. In a slow-moving medical organization, many other factors come into play, such as budget, ROI, clinician-patient workflow, internal champions to drive adoption within the system, etc. You would be more aware than me of potential roadblocks in the system for change and adoption to happen. I am weighing this risk of failure to capitalize on the tech and implementation as pretty high, or at least until I see some evidence of the new management team gaining traction.
In a previous post, I referenced a webinar from Impeded on 3/3/23, where the headline read "the best big idea is only going to be as good as its implementation."
https://youtu.be/C04AxtJoDXU 3/3/2023
I guess what I'm trying to say is that despite a product/tech/workflow having proven efficacy, it is no guarantee of adoption and commercial success.
As you noted, it is over to the new board and management now to show they can drive adoption and capitalise on the NCCN guidelines
I see this as the key point to watch going forward.
Held: