Fred, first I would ask you to look at the two messages on the "sticky" part of the board relating to the N-Assay. They provide me with great confidence in the N-Assay as a product. The evolution is slow and that is something that makes things a bit frustrating. But the patent is there and the quality of the N-Assay is undeniable. I think that the Faros should be publishing academic papers in what we can hope are highly regarded journals and that they will be out soon. The academic and scientific worlds are, however, enough to drive you nuts with the slow pace of how they function and transmit knowledge.
My hope for the N-Assay is based on its rapid detection capability across a wide range of infectious bacterial and viral ailments, quite a few of them potentially deadly and very costly. When there are a range of possible problems based on a person's symptoms then you want to be able to evaluate sources and causes simultaneously rather than sequentially and this is what the N-Assay provides. The two products represented by the N-Assay and the petri packaging (coupled with the BNF) should sustain NanoLogix for several years. Most all of us feel very good about the products.
As has been suggested numerous times, and it is a valid point, the key to the ultimate success is marketing and market penetration. Given the scale of the company and what it will take to have it "soar" it doesn't have to be anything like market dominance. What it needs is some combination of a reliable group of product users and one or two dedicated user markets in which the NanoLogix tech is accepted as the best and most rapid available. Along with this is the possibility of a large company licensing or buying outright the N-Assay and radically increasing the company's royalty intake so that NanoLogix doesn't have to ramp up production in what appears to be a shifting and seemingly unreliable market where the major medical diagnostic firms can act in ways that undermine the NanoLogix products' advantages and engage in loss leader type activities because they sell a diverse set of products with significant margins so can undercut pricing on lower end stuff.
Having said all that I am still quite positive even when understanding the obstacles the company faces, including the lack of the kind of cash that would be helpful in implementing a "full court press" marketing strategy. That is why I said the Faros are important independent of academic papers because within an important market niche they provide credibility. The packaging patent with its ability to have lengthy shelf lives in low tech areas of high need (China) is also a potentially strong area of advantage. The multi-well feature of the N-Assay and its ability to be "customized" to a variety of diverse medical user needs is also quite important so all I can say is that I have to trust (and do) that the company is conducting a very focused market strategy along such lines.
My hope for the N-Assay is based on its rapid detection capability across a wide range of infectious bacterial and viral ailments, quite a few of them potentially deadly and very costly. When there are a range of possible problems based on a person's symptoms then you want to be able to evaluate sources and causes simultaneously rather than sequentially and this is what the N-Assay provides. The two products represented by the N-Assay and the petri packaging (coupled with the BNF) should sustain NanoLogix for several years. Most all of us feel very good about the products.
As has been suggested numerous times, and it is a valid point, the key to the ultimate success is marketing and market penetration. Given the scale of the company and what it will take to have it "soar" it doesn't have to be anything like market dominance. What it needs is some combination of a reliable group of product users and one or two dedicated user markets in which the NanoLogix tech is accepted as the best and most rapid available. Along with this is the possibility of a large company licensing or buying outright the N-Assay and radically increasing the company's royalty intake so that NanoLogix doesn't have to ramp up production in what appears to be a shifting and seemingly unreliable market where the major medical diagnostic firms can act in ways that undermine the NanoLogix products' advantages and engage in loss leader type activities because they sell a diverse set of products with significant margins so can undercut pricing on lower end stuff.
Having said all that I am still quite positive even when understanding the obstacles the company faces, including the lack of the kind of cash that would be helpful in implementing a "full court press" marketing strategy. That is why I said the Faros are important independent of academic papers because within an important market niche they provide credibility. The packaging patent with its ability to have lengthy shelf lives in low tech areas of high need (China) is also a potentially strong area of advantage. The multi-well feature of the N-Assay and its ability to be "customized" to a variety of diverse medical user needs is also quite important so all I can say is that I have to trust (and do) that the company is conducting a very focused market strategy along such lines.
