Liquid core optical fiber diagnostic tool

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Liquid core optical fiber diagnostic tool by Mind Map: Liquid core optical fiber diagnostic tool

1. Nuevo Tema

1.1. Nuevo Tema

2. 6 financial analysis

2.1. customer value proposition

2.1.1. bcause this is a flow-trough system and provides a real time signal

2.2. seller value proposition

2.3. projections

2.3.1. it does not require the use chemical reagent and will not require amgoing chemical reagent costs.

2.3.2. the total hurldivide market for process spectroscopy instrumentation is excepted to rise from $178 million in 2004 to $ 252 million in 2009

3. 7 proposed activities

3.1. recommendation

3.1.1. in summary, LCOFS weaknesses in a lack of a compelling case for a return over investment over time through a soungs of sagent costs , and the existence of equipment total that is satisfying the market make the invention known place advertising of the service

3.2. next steps

4. 1 technology

4.1. barriers

4.1.1. laws of nature FDA approval processes including clinical triais and validation studies the FDA regulates medicine and chargers every tets the consumer performs

4.2. description

4.2.1. context the liquid cure optical fiber biofluids

4.2.2. credibility the tube can allow for an automated hug volume system for ractine clinical laboratory testing

4.2.3. non-propietary liquid core and additional corrective quauties, but that everything else regarding the technology is already patented.

4.3. risk/mitigation

4.3.1. performance uses raman sprectroscopy to provide fast and accurate analysis for the basic chemical diagnostic pancis sought in blood and urine testing

4.4. status

4.4.1. prototype created by the shape of the analysis corected with software and using a simultaneis neasyrenebt if white light

4.4.2. proof of concept the potential for real time monitoring of liquid compounds.

4.4.3. scability because those business entities need east- effective , rapid processing.

5. 2 market

5.1. pain

5.1.1. it does not require the use of chemical reagenes and will not require angoing chemical reagent costs.

5.1.2. the raman spectroscopy is done on a single sample of blood requiring a much smaller, blood sample from the patient

5.2. interest

5.2.1. another potential use might be along burder towns in mexico but this technology may be well suited for routine pre-natal blood testing among border populations

5.3. customers

5.3.1. centralized laboratories, in- hospital laboratories, goverment laboratories, veterinary laboratories.

5.4. characteristics

5.4.1. size as a workhorse analytical tool for testing routine blood and urine samples if would oct as a supplementary device in a lab

6. 3 competition

6.1. market

6.1.1. direct this tool will comple directly with devices like the RXL dimension, manufactures by date behring

6.1.2. indirect other competitors that could frasibly enter the market include compantes that make hand had ramar tools

6.2. future

6.2.1. existing companies white , rama spectroscops has introads , it is still procived as man of a qualitative than a quantitative technology

6.2.2. new technologies the LCOF device has a more limited test range than machines competing with , and offers to a suookemental device rather then a replacement

6.3. technical

6.3.1. one potential market are the centralized laboratory that perform outsource testing of blood and urine samples for doctor´s offices and regional clinical networks

7. 5 commercialization planning

7.1. bussines model

7.1.1. parnetship

7.1.2. startup cost breakdown

7.1.3. license

7.2. sustainability

7.2.1. economic a total ballpark or patting together a research quality prototype us $30.000

7.3. barriers

7.3.1. regulatory the equipment will need FDA and CLIA approvais

7.4. risk/mitigation

7.4.1. market the total morldwibe market for process spectroscopy instrumentation is expected to rise from $178 million to $232 million in 2009, at an average annual grouth rate (AAGR) of 5.4%

8. 4 intellectual property

8.1. patents

8.1.1. no plain

8.2. trade secrets

8.2.1. status, ownership, risck/mitigation barrers the LCOF device has a more limited thest range than machines his competing with, and offers to a suppermental device rather than a replacement.

8.3. copyrights

8.3.1. there maybe soecific errors necesary to protect that patentiality

8.4. trademarks

8.4.1. that patents exist on much of this technology , and our other experts agreed that most of this technology is standard raman technique. this tool´s novelty is that the biofluids are being produc in tube and the tool has an additional corrective methodology to improve its accurracy