Interview with Patrick May Vice President of Sales and Marketing of Genex Technologies Inc.
Share:
AO/Beck: Hi Patrick. Thanks for spending a little time with me today.
May: Hi Doug. Thanks for the invitation.
AO/Beck: I know you are introducing a new technology to the hearing healthcare industry, and I'd be honored to discuss that with you. Can you please give me an overview of the company and their products?
May: Genex Technologies is a company that has historically been an R & D, technology-oriented group. We have developed a number of innovative imaging technologies, primarily using our special camera, called the Rainbow 3D capture system, and we have about 25 patents pending or granted for that technology. We use a white-light technology in this camera system to create an efficient image capturing system, and it yields an amazingly accurate representation of a 3D product. The specific product for the hearing healthcare industry is called the Genex EI 3D Digitizer. The EI stands for ear impression.
AO/Beck: And it seems to me that the immediate application of this technology is the almost instantaneous transformation of the ear impression to a 3D image, which can be transmitted electronically to the manufacturer, from which they can create a better hearing aid shell very rapidly?
May: That's right. We introduced this technology to the hearing healthcare professionals at AAA in Philadelphia and the response has been very good.
AO/Beck: So the system does not use a LASER light beam; it actually uses white light?
May: Yes, we use a white light, and it is very accurate. In fact we get accuracy up to 25 microns and that's a very accurate data set from which to build a hearing aid shell or an earmold.
AO/Beck: Is anyone in the hearing healthcare industry using this technology at this time?
May: The product is in beta-test at several leading hearing aid manufacturers.
AO/Beck: Please explain to me why you use white light rather than a LASER light source?
May: White light allows a very simple design, and we don't need a ton of moving parts. We can produce a higher resolution output than do the LASER-based companies. Additionally, because it is a simple design, wear and tear will be less in the long run. So we provide a quicker and more accurate data set, and we can do that at a lower cost.
AO/Beck: Can I ask what the system costs?
May: The standard system is roughly 50 thousand dollars at this time. So for this to make economic sense, the office using it has to be doing a very high volume. However, this is a forward-looking product. The office has to be able to say that the shipping, the packaging, the time involved in shipping, and the cost of expediting these orders is worth automating these functions. The smaller offices won't realize the cost benefit at the current price, but the larger offices will find it beneficial. Anyone that adopts this technology will have an advantage with customers by being able to cut turnaround times by the time required for shipping the impressions today (one to seven days, depending on methods currently used). They'll have a better and more accurate result in the end, while reducing the returns, because less people will handle the ear impression between the removal from the ear and the creation of the plastic shell. And customers will benefit with better fitting products that can be delivered more quickly. The customer can potentially be told that the manufacturer is producing the shell the same day as the office visit!
AO/Beck: So at this current price, you really don't anticipate too many folks buying this do you?
May: Not a large number of initial buyers. The manufacturers and large practices will buy it initially (driven by economic savings). Some service bureaus may be set up (either by manufacturers or third parties) in metropolitan centers where the smaller practice can drop off the impressions for scanning and immediate transmission to the manufacturer. Once we get some more volume, hopefully we'll get the cost down and there will be more acceptance of the technology as the best practice. The local offices will begin to see that they should adopt the technology, and it'll become the standard way of transferring the physical parameters of each individual ear.
AO/Beck: It seems to me that the 3D imaging system is really an amazing product, but even if we all had this product in the office, I still have to make an ear impression, right?
May: Yes, you still need to take the ear impression.
AO/Beck: So it seems like the really big win will occur when you can hand me a white light probe, or a LASER probe, that I can stick in the ear canal, and from that, collect the 3D image you need to make the earmold or the hearing aid shell. Am I close?
May: Sure. That's the ultimate goal here. The thing is, because the ear has so many curves and bends, it's not likely to happen anytime soon. In other words, wherever you position the probe tip, it'll pretty much have to shoot behind a curve or a wall to get the full 3D image of the ear. You cannot use one data collection location. You'd need at least two sets of data points, and perhaps three, to really get a complete representation of all the nooks and crannies of the ear canal and the pinna. You need the ability to see around the corner because the principle of the system requires a reflection of light off of all the surfaces you desire to reconstruct. Hair in the ear can also be a problem. These are the key technical challenges.
AO/Beck: But I'll bet your company is working to solve this?
May: We have some prototypes we're designing for dental applications, but it will take time to make those commercially available. I think it'll take another 18 to 24 months before we get close to that ability for the ear.
AO/Beck: This sounds very exciting, and I'm glad we had the opportunity to speak a little about this. For people interested in contacting you, can you please give me your contact information?
May: Sure Doug. They can get in touch with me by sending an email to patmay@genextech.com or calling 301-962-6565 extension 104. They can also visit our website at https://www.genextech.com.
May: Hi Doug. Thanks for the invitation.
AO/Beck: I know you are introducing a new technology to the hearing healthcare industry, and I'd be honored to discuss that with you. Can you please give me an overview of the company and their products?
May: Genex Technologies is a company that has historically been an R & D, technology-oriented group. We have developed a number of innovative imaging technologies, primarily using our special camera, called the Rainbow 3D capture system, and we have about 25 patents pending or granted for that technology. We use a white-light technology in this camera system to create an efficient image capturing system, and it yields an amazingly accurate representation of a 3D product. The specific product for the hearing healthcare industry is called the Genex EI 3D Digitizer. The EI stands for ear impression.
AO/Beck: And it seems to me that the immediate application of this technology is the almost instantaneous transformation of the ear impression to a 3D image, which can be transmitted electronically to the manufacturer, from which they can create a better hearing aid shell very rapidly?
May: That's right. We introduced this technology to the hearing healthcare professionals at AAA in Philadelphia and the response has been very good.
AO/Beck: So the system does not use a LASER light beam; it actually uses white light?
May: Yes, we use a white light, and it is very accurate. In fact we get accuracy up to 25 microns and that's a very accurate data set from which to build a hearing aid shell or an earmold.
AO/Beck: Is anyone in the hearing healthcare industry using this technology at this time?
May: The product is in beta-test at several leading hearing aid manufacturers.
AO/Beck: Please explain to me why you use white light rather than a LASER light source?
May: White light allows a very simple design, and we don't need a ton of moving parts. We can produce a higher resolution output than do the LASER-based companies. Additionally, because it is a simple design, wear and tear will be less in the long run. So we provide a quicker and more accurate data set, and we can do that at a lower cost.
AO/Beck: Can I ask what the system costs?
May: The standard system is roughly 50 thousand dollars at this time. So for this to make economic sense, the office using it has to be doing a very high volume. However, this is a forward-looking product. The office has to be able to say that the shipping, the packaging, the time involved in shipping, and the cost of expediting these orders is worth automating these functions. The smaller offices won't realize the cost benefit at the current price, but the larger offices will find it beneficial. Anyone that adopts this technology will have an advantage with customers by being able to cut turnaround times by the time required for shipping the impressions today (one to seven days, depending on methods currently used). They'll have a better and more accurate result in the end, while reducing the returns, because less people will handle the ear impression between the removal from the ear and the creation of the plastic shell. And customers will benefit with better fitting products that can be delivered more quickly. The customer can potentially be told that the manufacturer is producing the shell the same day as the office visit!
AO/Beck: So at this current price, you really don't anticipate too many folks buying this do you?
May: Not a large number of initial buyers. The manufacturers and large practices will buy it initially (driven by economic savings). Some service bureaus may be set up (either by manufacturers or third parties) in metropolitan centers where the smaller practice can drop off the impressions for scanning and immediate transmission to the manufacturer. Once we get some more volume, hopefully we'll get the cost down and there will be more acceptance of the technology as the best practice. The local offices will begin to see that they should adopt the technology, and it'll become the standard way of transferring the physical parameters of each individual ear.
AO/Beck: It seems to me that the 3D imaging system is really an amazing product, but even if we all had this product in the office, I still have to make an ear impression, right?
May: Yes, you still need to take the ear impression.
AO/Beck: So it seems like the really big win will occur when you can hand me a white light probe, or a LASER probe, that I can stick in the ear canal, and from that, collect the 3D image you need to make the earmold or the hearing aid shell. Am I close?
May: Sure. That's the ultimate goal here. The thing is, because the ear has so many curves and bends, it's not likely to happen anytime soon. In other words, wherever you position the probe tip, it'll pretty much have to shoot behind a curve or a wall to get the full 3D image of the ear. You cannot use one data collection location. You'd need at least two sets of data points, and perhaps three, to really get a complete representation of all the nooks and crannies of the ear canal and the pinna. You need the ability to see around the corner because the principle of the system requires a reflection of light off of all the surfaces you desire to reconstruct. Hair in the ear can also be a problem. These are the key technical challenges.
AO/Beck: But I'll bet your company is working to solve this?
May: We have some prototypes we're designing for dental applications, but it will take time to make those commercially available. I think it'll take another 18 to 24 months before we get close to that ability for the ear.
AO/Beck: This sounds very exciting, and I'm glad we had the opportunity to speak a little about this. For people interested in contacting you, can you please give me your contact information?
May: Sure Doug. They can get in touch with me by sending an email to patmay@genextech.com or calling 301-962-6565 extension 104. They can also visit our website at https://www.genextech.com.
