Hey
@DaveFromChicago!
The point that I was trying to make above is that in order to get a product to market and further test its efficacy, it's easier to do so by keeping a narrow focus on inclusion criteria. I personally do not believe this treatment will
only work for those who have the trial inclusion criteria. Why? Based on answers Dr. Shore has given in interviews + 20 years of experience. IMO, early stage investing is often believing in the founder. Which in this case I strongly believe in. Could I be wrong? Sure. Such is investing. Especially early stage.
The rough investment thesis I have is this.
20 million people have burdensome tinnitus. There is no available treatment. Hearing loss is on the rise. More will present with tinnitus percept in years to come.
Even if this treatment only affects 5% of the available population, here's my TAM math:
20 million tinnitus sufferers X 5% = 1 million patient population (who are starving for a solution to their problem).
1 million x $2500 (basing on Lenire pricing) = $2.5 billion in revenue. Public companies are currently trading at an average of 20x revenue.
If I were to invest $10,000 on current terms of a $2.3 million valuation and there's a liquidity event, and they're only a 1/10th of the size I referenced above - that's still a frothy return.