Whatever Happened To All The Replicel/shiseido Hype?

[rclark]

I wait in the silent emptiness of contemplation, devoid of anticipation or judgement...

View attachment 83646

Science is based on facts, and logic is based on past facts.

Sitting on my desk and not actively researching solutions is a complete waste of
time for me.

 

[rclark]

Lol they're already in the top 3 richest countries by gdp. You think hairloss is that lucrative to make a whole country more rich ? i suggest you read big investment banks reports about hairloss treatment so you can understand why it's not that lucrative, people imagine hairloss cure will be so simple that you pop up a pill and there you go you have your hair back. no it's not going to be that simple it's going to involve a lot of resources and materials and not all people are to be ok with every treatment requirement (time, money, complexity ....) it can make every company involved in the supply chain rich if they manage to get the job done without investing a lot but not a whole country.

stop dreaming baldness is not a first world problem unless you're bald.

@Mykonas,

Instead of putting so much time and effort into writing stupid posts criticizing others, you
should concentrate on things that will actually BENEFIT people on a hairloss community.

Hair transplants cost between 4,000 and 15,000 United States dollars, which is quite a lot. That's more
money than two months of a mortgage payment on homes.

YOU: "stop dreaming baldness is not a first world problem unless you're bald."

NEWS FLASH FOR YOU - Men can and will pay money for HAIR loss solutions. And I don't
have to be a Norwood six or seven to understand that.

Hair Transplant Procedures: Average Cost, What to Expect, and More
https://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/hair-loss/men-hair-loss-17/hair-transplants

Dec 7, 2017 - The price of a hair transplant will depend largely on the amount of hair you're moving, but it generally ranges from $4,000 to $15,000. Most insurance plans don't cover it. As with any kind of surgery, transplants have some risks, including bleeding and infection.
‎Nonsurgical Treatments · ‎Tricks to Make Your Mop Look ... · ‎Men's Hair Loss

 

[Mykonas]

@Mykonas,

Instead of putting so much time and effort into writing stupid posts criticizing others, you
should concentrate on things that will actually BENEFIT people on a hairloss community.

Hair transplants cost between 4,000 and 15,000 United States dollars, which is quite a lot. That's more
money than two months of a mortgage payment on homes.

YOU: "stop dreaming baldness is not a first world problem unless you're bald."

NEWS FLASH FOR YOU - Men can and will pay money for HAIR loss solutions. And I don't
have to be a Norwood six or seven to understand that.

Hair Transplant Procedures: Average Cost, What to Expect, and More
https://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/hair-loss/men-hair-loss-17/hair-transplants

Dec 7, 2017 - The price of a hair transplant will depend largely on the amount of hair you're moving, but it generally ranges from $4,000 to $15,000. Most insurance plans don't cover it. As with any kind of surgery, transplants have some risks, including bleeding and infection.
‎Nonsurgical Treatments · ‎Tricks to Make Your Mop Look ... · ‎Men's Hair Loss

You can't be stupid enough to think that there is a 100% margin on that 4000$ to 15 000$ right ?

Hairloss market is not as much lucrative as people tend to think and that's a fact. For instance hairloss market size in 2017 was arround 3 billion $ do you know how much is the market size for skin bleaching ? 30 f*****g billion dollar, and who f*****g complain about skin bleaching ? i'm just telling you instead of blatantly throwing wrong informations out there, look for the right sources and the numbers on reports first.

So for someone scholar like tsuji to tackle hairloss money is not the first incentive, it's more about being the first to resolve one of the most challenging situations where many failed before him. and not to mention that it will open the door for the begining of a new revolution in medecine.

 

[Hate da Bt]

You can't be stupid enough to think that there is a 100% margin on that 4000$ to 15 000$ right ?

Hairloss market is not as much lucrative as people tend to think and that's a fact. For instance hairloss market size in 2017 was arround 3 billion $ do you know how much is the market size for skin bleaching ? 30 f*****g billion dollar, and who f*****g complain about skin bleaching ? i'm just telling you instead of blatantly throwing wrong informations out there, look for the right sources and the numbers on reports first.

So for someone scholar like tsuji to tackle hairloss money is not the first incentive, it's more about being the first to resolve one of the most challenging situations where many failed before him. and not to mention that it will open the door for the begining of a new revolution in medecine.

There are very effective to less effective treatments for skin bleaching, and the potential market is about a quarter of the human population. Only white people of european descent don't do skin bleaching. Africans, Mulattos, Hindis and even East Asians (more mildly, though) are into skin bleaching.
The hairloss market is smaller in size and there are only two moderately effective treatments available, min and finasteride, the latter with offputting sife effects. Transplants account for about half the current market value and a) not all people suffering from hair loss are candidates, b) it's a surgical procedure and that can be frightening for many, and c) the donor capacity is finite. A potential treatment with an effectiveness comparable to finasteride without its side effects would be way more successful and many more hair loss sufferers would opt for it. Or am I wrong?
Last but not least, a Tsuji-like treatment would be extremely lucrative hands down, once, of course, efficacy and safety were established. If, let's assume, 1 million people are treated per year and the cost is 10,000$, that's 10 fuckin' billion$. If 5 million people, that would be 50 billion$. That's huge, isn't it?
In a nutshell, you compared pears with apples and, therefore, your point is invalid.

 

[d3nt3dsh0v3l]

@Mykonas,

Instead of putting so much time and effort into writing stupid posts criticizing others, you
should concentrate on things that will actually BENEFIT people on a hairloss community.

Hair transplants cost between 4,000 and 15,000 United States dollars, which is quite a lot. That's more
money than two months of a mortgage payment on homes.

YOU: "stop dreaming baldness is not a first world problem unless you're bald."

NEWS FLASH FOR YOU - Men can and will pay money for HAIR loss solutions. And I don't
have to be a Norwood six or seven to understand that.

Hair Transplant Procedures: Average Cost, What to Expect, and More
https://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/hair-loss/men-hair-loss-17/hair-transplants

Dec 7, 2017 - The price of a hair transplant will depend largely on the amount of hair you're moving, but it generally ranges from $4,000 to $15,000. Most insurance plans don't cover it. As with any kind of surgery, transplants have some risks, including bleeding and infection.
‎Nonsurgical Treatments · ‎Tricks to Make Your Mop Look ... · ‎Men's Hair Loss

Don't listen to them. To first order, the hairloss market, were a successful, side-effect free, long-term solution available, would in all likelihood be analogous to the orthodontics industry.

Yes, it is cosmetic. Yes, it can be relatively expensive. No, not everyone will even consider doing it. But a sizable portion of people will. The market size overall will be large enough for the practice to thrive.

Admittedly this is speculation on my part. But I can see great parallels between orthodontia and trichology.

 

[Trichosan]

Don't listen to them. To first order, the hairloss market, were a successful, side-effect free, long-term solution available, would in all likelihood be analogous to the orthodontics industry...Admittedly this is speculation on my part. But I can see great parallels between orthodontia and trichology.

I don't understand the relationship, but am curious. What is it? Are you an orthodontist?

 

[d3nt3dsh0v3l]

I don't understand the relationship, but am curious. What is it? Are you an orthodontist?

Not relationship. Analogy.
Both are cosmetic treatments and will likely not involve insurance coverage.
Both can be administered within a private practice with medical professionals on hand, who practice on a relatively straightforward, non life-threatening portion of the body in a minimally invasive manner. In other words, it is low-risk outpatient care and a private practice with one or two doctors and several assistants can produce reasonable patient throughput.
Both involve treatment timescales that may span one to several years.
The cost (order of magnitude) and results can be similar. An involved orthodontic plan including orthognathic surgery may be tens of thousands in total; a treatment such as follica's may be a few thousand in total as would basic orthodontic treatment.
Both address a pain point of the customer of improving cosmetic appearance for social benefits.
Both may offer preventative, early treatment plans to ensure a favorable outcome, as well as treatment for those in the late stages; i.e. better late than never.

If Tsuji/follica/some neogenesis method pans out, I'm saying it would not be surprising to me if the services offered by trichologists were distributed in a manner similar to orthodontia.

I am not an orthodontist, but have had extensive work done and due to paranoia, have tried to learn as much as I can about the field in relation to my problems.

 

[Trichosan]

Science is based on facts, and logic is based on past facts.

Sitting on my desk and not actively researching solutions is a complete waste of
time for me.

Understood. My reference stems from observation of what goes on in hair loss forums-quote the research, speculate on validity and commercialization. I'm aware of all the current research and for my state of hair loss, patiently waiting for release, most likely Tsuji, is all I can do. So much we see here, unfortunately degenerates into attacking other members positions, which is a waste of time. Not applying that to you at all though, @rclark.

 

[Mykonas]

There are very effective to less effective treatments for skin bleaching, and the potential market is about a quarter of the human population. Only white people of european descent don't do skin bleaching. Africans, Mulattos, Hindis and even East Asians (more mildly, though) are into skin bleaching.
The hairloss market is smaller in size and there are only two moderately effective treatments available, min and finasteride, the latter with offputting sife effects. Transplants account for about half the current market value and a) not all people suffering from hair loss are candidates, b) it's a surgical procedure and that can be frightening for many, and c) the donor capacity is finite. A potential treatment with an effectiveness comparable to finasteride without its side effects would be way more successful and many more hair loss sufferers would opt for it. Or am I wrong?
Last but not least, a Tsuji-like treatment would be extremely lucrative hands down, once, of course, efficacy and safety were established. If, let's assume, 1 million people are treated per year and the cost is 10,000$, that's 10 fuckin' billion$. If 5 million people, that would be 50 billion$. That's huge, isn't it?
In a nutshell, you compared pears with apples and, therefore, your point is invalid.

Except the cure to hairloss won't be like every other generic product/drug that can be mass produced to cover those unrealistic patient numbers you just threw there. tsuji's methode is still a complexe medical procedure, that makes it impossible to expand the market size based on the novelty of the product, the process is too complexe to still be profitable at a low break even point while covering 5 million patient per year

 

[Hate da Bt]

Except the cure to hairloss won't be like every other generic product/drug that can be mass produced to cover those unrealistic patient numbers you just threw there. tsuji's methode is still a complexe medical procedure, that makes it impossible to expand the market size based on the novelty of the product, the process is too complexe to still be profitable at a low break even point while covering 5 million patient per year

They expect to treat 10,000 individuals in the very first year, and the technology ain't as complex as you claim. It's cell culturing and injections, performed by hair transplant surgeons.

 

[Janks16]

Here's a video from the Replicel site that breaks down the basics of their hair regrowth treatment:

 

[Omega2327]

Thanks for the clarification.
Can somebody link the source of this info?

If even Tsuji said 2022, then there's reason to take heart.

1:32

I feel like I've had the Tsuji argument so many times, I'm not gonna rehash. All I will say is don't start spreading fake news about dates when you don't have a source to back it up (not talking to you Razz).

Tsuji all the way baby.

 

[That Guy]

Someone posted screenshots of people who were active in this forum in 2007 and it was so depressing to see old members talking about a cure coming in 2012. They were never seen again in this forum. I also wonder what they are doing right now. How must it feel to wait 10+ years hoping for a cure and nothing ever came!

They are probably all 10 years older, bald, hating life. I assume that's probably true for most of them.

To be honest, if I were among them ten years ago, I'd have shared in the pessimism.

I was really lucky, because when I started going bald a couple years ago. I was under the impression there was nothing, no medication or anything you could do about it. I can truly say I've never been so unhappy in my life and I had really bad child and teen years and I sh*t you not, the realization of hairloss was somehow just worse.

Honestly, stem cell technologies are the only technologies I am optimistic will not only be here soon (not counting bone marrow obviously), but that I actually think will be good for us.

I loathe a lot of other technological developments.

As a kid/teen in the 2000s, I used to find technology fascinating and great, and I daydreamed about the future being a sci-fi place. Unfortunately though, now that I'm an adult living more and more in that future, I'm finding it more to be like Blade Runner or Hunger Games than one of the more peaceful Star Wars prequel planets.

I think I was of this generation that got to reap the benefits of advancing tech without suffering the yet-to-be consequences. It used to be that it made for an improved version of old styles of entertainment, access to an entire library on a single device, computers were more like tools, and you could phone easily without a landline.

Now? Phones, social media and video games consume people's lives; wasting thousands of hours, AI is rapidly replacing all human creativity and ingenuity, automation threatens to destabilize all of society by removing jobs that give us meaning, purpose and a place within society; we've become more shallow and self-centered than I ever thought possible, relationships mean nothing and last for but an instant, friendships exist in name and facebook statuses only, racial and political tensions are at the highest they've been since decades before I was born, memes and lies that enter the public opinion through the net lead to real social ramifications, Islamic Jihadis threaten the world on a scale not seen since the Ottomans, looming possibilities of war, pollution getting even more out of control to the point we might not be able to undo the damage in time, privacy is but a distant memory with everything now requiring an online presence that demands your information at every turn, money is increasingly placed in untrustworthy sources like PayPal that is so often compromised, this list just goes on....

I have no confidence we'll colonize the solar system or that anyone will want to live off Earth even if we do. I don't think AI and automation can peacefully co-exist with us nor can we can we co-exist with each other in a world ruled by it. I don't think we'll cure a lot of old, life-threatening diseases in my lifetime.

Grow hair. f*** women. Die — It's not hard to see why so many here want that life plan before it's too late.

 

[inmyhead]

Weren't we supposed to get data from shiseido in Q2 of 2018?

 

[razzmatazz91]

Weren't we supposed to get data from shiseido in Q2 of 2018?

Q2 is July to September.

Financial Years start April 1, so this is actually Q1.

 

[inmyhead]

Q2 is July to September.

Financial Years start April 1, so this is actually Q1.

Are you talking about fiscal year? That just depends on the country / company. You don't know if Shiseido is counting it's fiscal year from April 1st. You don't make any sense

 

[razzmatazz91]

Are you talking about fiscal year? That just depends on the country / company. You don't know if Shiseido is counting it's fiscal year from April 1st. You don't make any sense

It depends on when Fiscal Year starts in Japan. A member here told us that it is indeed April 1 to March 31, just like most asian countries.

I don't make any sense? WTF dude.... read stuff.

Elon Musk in your profile pic made me think you're a smart guy. Halo effect, I guess.

 

[inmyhead]

It depends on when Fiscal Year starts in Japan. A member here told us that it is indeed April 1 to March 31, just like most asian countries.

I don't make any sense? WTF dude.... read stuff.

Elon Musk in your profile pic made me think you're a smart guy. Halo effect, I guess.

It was replicel, who told us to expect data from shiseido in Q2, so why would they talk about Asian Q2 and not the normal one

 

[razzmatazz91]

It was replicel, who told us to expect data from shiseido in Q2, so why would they talk about Asian Q2 and not the normal one

It was in a note/publication/whateverit'scalled meant for investors.
That's why it almost certainly meant Q2 of FY 2018-19, rather than Q2 2018.

 

[inmyhead]

Remember the start of 2017 when they told us about releasing some data ( it was 5 year safety if I remember correctly ) in Q1 and they did release it at the end of February. They always speak in normal quarters, not fiscal.