Here were three things. In my opinion, in order of importance, they were:
- Nightingale is now able to produce risk predictions adapted to ethnic groups. For this purpose, biobank agreements have been made around the world, and this does something completely different than just biomarkers. This is what they mean when they say âmodular architectureâ.
- Through adaptation, risk predictions are made more suitable for the partnerâs/customerâs business, but also a moat is built. Biomarker measurements can be bought elsewhere, at least a couple of other companies also do NMR analysis, but without the ability for this adaptation enabled by a massive data bank, they cannot replace Nightingale.
- A couple of new risk predictions for very relevant diseases show that the expansion of ICD codes has not just been talk. These just happen over time because research cannot be skipped.
Now, just get that large-scale commercial agreement finalized from around the world. Terveystalo is a relevant player, but it doesnât convince the international market.
An interesting announcement indeed. Itâs very likely that these risk forecasts can be made much more extensively in the future. I personally see more content in the news than Inderesâ analysis suggested.
The flood of good news has continued for quite a long time now without significant stock price changes. This is partly due to reductions by a few larger players. When something that brings cash flow in laymanâs terms appears for the first time, the powder might be dry for an even bigger spurt.
The stock price wonât change significantly until sales announcements are received. Of course, other news is also positive, but only sales will determine if the stock will ever rise.
Iâm waiting for the listing in the US. Thereâs volume there for a price increase once NG also publishes information there.
If we could get a few big names to promote this, it would really put wind in its sails. Itâs true that this needs sales. But now, risk forecasts have emerged for diseases that are already significant, not only for the individual but also for the national economy.
Itâs time to wake up from hibernation 
Looks like a small workshop still
This will still take some time. Even a pilot agreement is only planned to start at the beginning of this year. The agreement itself is also just a letter of intent.
Was it the same company as Enigma Genomics?
Oh for crying out loud 
Thanks.
I donât know if that can even be found anywhere, the AI helped by mixing up all the ones named Enigma (judging by the page list):
Letâs ask a bit more precisely:
Iâm on the same level as the dumb AI 
Where do you estimate NHâs sales are most likely to come from in the next six months? There are already several pilot and letter of intent agreements, but to my understanding, a larger sales-oriented agreement has not yet materialized?
I had to ask ChatGPT for a little help with this news, and if it could clarify what all is said in the news, as it was a bit too much of a âWall Of Textâ for me at this point in the day 
But this is the summary the AI spat out:
Key points:
- Nightingale Healthâs expansion into the United States: The company is establishing a laboratory in New York, which brings regulatory advantages.
- Regulatory advantage in New York: New York laboratories require CLEP approval, which eliminates the need for CLIA licensing and may delay FDA approval until 2027.
- FDA regulatory reform:
- The FDAâs new regulations concerning laboratory tests and quality management give Nightingale Health a competitive edge.
- FDA approval is only required from November 2027 onwards.
- A CLEP-approved laboratory may potentially operate without FDA approval even after this.
- ISO 13485 standard-compliant quality management:
- US quality requirements are being harmonized with the international ISO 13485 standard.
- Nightingale Health is already ISO 13485 certified, which accelerates market entry.
@Antti_Luiro, could you give an estimate on this, as I was thinking about the number of samples needed in relation to the required revenue for break-even.
Roughly, with 24⏠* 1,000,000 samples, we would reach the 25M revenue levels that you previously thought were needed for that milestone.
If Iâve understood correctly, about 100k is the capacity of one lab, meaning 10 labs at full capacity would be needed for that. It feels like thereâs still quite a long way to go. If, in a bad scenario, even in the US, only that one lab remains and FDA approval is delayed or falls through, not very large quantities can be processed there either.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
There seems to be a huge market, if that Yle news from 2019 is to be believed. In Finland alone, 70 million blood samples are taken annually, 90% of which are taken in public healthcare. Furthermore, healthcare seems to be shifting increasingly from treating symptoms to a preventive model, which could be expected to increase the number of annual samples.
Edit: Of course, Nightingaleâs service itself probably reduces the number of samples needed, but that is also a good selling point.
100k is roughly the annual capacity of one device, but labs can have several of these. The sample processing capacity of labs should be relatively easy to scale up with demand, unless the facilities happen to be very small. Roughly 12 NMR devices x ~90 thousand samples = 1.08 million samples per year, and I would be surprised if these devices (and of course other steps required by the process) wouldnât fit into the current 3 (4 after the US labs) laboratory facilities. Of course, from a logistics perspective, the number of labs also matters, so that samples donât have to be transported an incredibly long distance from the sampling site, at least not in large volumes.
From the perspective of achieving cash flow positivity, I would think the number of labs is secondary here, and the question is more about the development of customer demand (=where to get sufficient sample volume from paying customers).
According to the company, the price of its NMR device is typically less than 1 MEUR and its capacity is approximately 90 thousand tested blood samples per year.
From that, it would be easy for the public sector to calculate whether there would be savings and how much.