This is a snippet of the transcript, sign up to read more.
I'm not sure about the exact percentage, but it was high. In terms of revenue, the margin was very good. It depends on the country due to restrictions and policies. For example, in Japan, probably 90% was PGT-A. In Dubai and the Middle East, the exome or CGT testing was probably 70% to 80%. Another test, ERA, was also very common in almost every country. In Brazil, there were many cases of oncology and exome analysis for genetic testing of disorders and PGT-A due to the large population. However, I don't have the exact percentages in mind. It varies between countries due to regulations.
This is a snippet of the transcript, sign up to read more.
I believe the risk is higher because of competitors like Juno. For instance, the situation with Igenomix and Vitrolife is unclear from a business perspective. Igenomix focuses on services, support, and quality, while Vitrolife is focused on products. The support and services are lacking. This was my impression when I was there, and I feel this sentiment has grown. Employees at Igenomix feel they aren't operating as they did before when it was solely Igenomix. Some people are moving from Igenomix to Juno.
This is a snippet of the transcript, sign up to read more.
Then the learning curve is very short. Juno has the opportunity to quickly translate new technologies into products or protocols because they have people with this expertise. They don't need to create it; they already have it. This is a real risk for Igenomix. People are moving, and there are others like Sistemas Genomicos, which was recently acquired by Eurofins and then Eurofins acquired Synlab. This might be beneficial for Igenomix and Juno, but not for Sistemas Genomicos.
This is a snippet of the transcript, sign up to read more.
This document may not be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means including resale of any part, unauthorised distribution to a third party or other electronic methods, without the prior written permission of IP 1 Ltd.
IP 1 Ltd, trading as In Practise (herein referred to as "IP") is a company registered in England and Wales and is not a registered investment advisor or broker-dealer, and is not licensed nor qualified to provide investment advice.
In Practise reserves all copyright, intellectual and other property rights in the Content. The information published in this transcript (“Content”) is for information purposes only and should not be used as the sole basis for making any investment decision. Information provided by IP is to be used as an educational tool and nothing in this Content shall be construed as an offer, recommendation or solicitation regarding any financial product, service or management of investments or securities. The views of the executive expressed in the Content are those of the expert and they are not endorsed by, nor do they represent the opinion of In Practise. In Practise makes no representations and accepts no liability for the Content or for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies will in no way be held liable for any potential or actual violations of laws, including without limitation any securities laws, based on Information sent to you by In Practise.
© 2024 IP 1 Ltd. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to access hundreds of interviews and primary research