Following the broad response and discussion around my previous post, I thought it was worth revisiting one part of the DeepView thesis that may be especially useful for those newer to the Spectral AI community: the potential health economics. This has been discussed before, but I think it’s important when considering commercialization and adoption.

Spectral estimates ~$24,000 in potential savings per burn stay, while an earlier SEC filing estimated ~$63,100 per DFU stay. These are company estimates, not yet proven real-world savings — which is exactly why the BARDA-supported health-economic and outcome research is interesting.

I also think this needs to be viewed in the context of management’s longer-term strategy. DeepView isn’t intended to remain simply a burn device. The broader vision is a wound-diagnostics medtech platform, with burn as the first FDA-authorized indication and potential expansion into DFU and other wounds. If successful, the opportunity becomes much larger than the burn-center market alone.

The economics could also extend beyond treatment itself. Better Day-One wound assessment could improve triage — determining who needs routine care, transfer to a burn/trauma center, or earlier intervention — potentially reducing unnecessary transfers, procedures, hospital stays and complications.

Longer term, if real-world evidence confirms meaningful reductions in total cost of care across wound indications, the incentive could extend beyond hospitals. Insurers and other payers could potentially encourage or incentivize objective wound assessment to reduce downstream healthcare costs.

That’s speculative today. But BARDA is helping fund the research that could determine whether this broader economic thesis holds up in the real world.

One point I think is easy to overlook is the scale of government backing already behind this technology. Since 2013, Spectral AI has received approximately $281.9M in U.S. government funding awards, with $272.9M coming from BARDA alone. That is a substantial amount of non-dilutive support for a company of MDAI’s size.

The current BARDA Project BioShield program adds another important dimension, including support for development and a pathway for procurement and deployment of up to 30 DeepView systems. There is also separate DoD-related funding through MTEC and the Defense Health Agency supporting development of the handheld DeepView SnapShot M.

That doesn’t eliminate the need for future capital, particularly if they aggressively expand into additional wound indications. But nearly $282M of government funding since 2013 changes how I look at that risk. A very substantial portion of the technology development, clinical validation and initial deployment pathway has already been financed without shareholder dilution.

For a company with MDAI’s current valuation, I think that government investment in the underlying platform is worth keeping in perspective when assessing its longer-term potential.

Sources:
Current SEC filing / BARDA (March 31, 2026):
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1833498/000121390026055226/ea0289162-10q\_spectral.htm

Earlier SEC filing / DFU estimate (December 31, 2023):
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1833498/000121390024027863/ea0202419-10k\_spectral.htm

Following the broad response and discussion around my previous post, I thought it was worth revisiting one part of the DeepView thesis that may be especially useful for those newer to the Spectral AI community: the potential health economics. This has been discussed before, but I think it’s important when considering commercialization and adoption.

Spectral estimates ~$24,000 in potential savings per burn stay, while an earlier SEC filing estimated ~$63,100 per DFU stay. These are company estimates, not yet proven real-world savings — which is exactly why the BARDA-supported health-economic and outcome research is interesting.

I also think this needs to be viewed in the context of management’s longer-term strategy. DeepView isn’t intended to remain simply a burn device. The broader vision is a wound-diagnostics medtech platform, with burn as the first FDA-authorized indication and potential expansion into DFU and other wounds. If successful, the opportunity becomes much larger than the burn-center market alone.

The economics could also extend beyond treatment itself. Better Day-One wound assessment could improve triage — determining who needs routine care, transfer to a burn/trauma center, or earlier intervention — potentially reducing unnecessary transfers, procedures, hospital stays and complications.

Longer term, if real-world evidence confirms meaningful reductions in total cost of care across wound indications, the incentive could extend beyond hospitals. Insurers and other payers could potentially encourage or incentivize objective wound assessment to reduce downstream healthcare costs.

That’s speculative today. But BARDA is helping fund the research that could determine whether this broader economic thesis holds up in the real world.

Sources:
Current SEC filing / BARDA (March 31, 2026):
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1833498/000121390026055226/ea0289162-10q_spectral.htm

Earlier SEC filing / DFU estimate (December 31, 2023):
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1833498/000121390024027863/ea0202419-10k_spectral.htm

https://spectralmd.gcs-web.com/node/9841/pdf

https://spectralmd.gcs-web.com/news-events/events

https://www.precedenceresearch.com/news/spectral-ai-abwm-wound-healing-awareness-month

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1833498/000121390026044635/ea0285119-03.htm

Alright, alright, so some of you have been paying attention and learning to read and think for yourselves. Well good on you! A low bar, but a bar passed no less in this age of AI slop ;)

And AI is the business we are in, so we ought to know, right? So know this, DeepView is no slop. This is the real F'in deal. Uncle Sam has officially said so. Congrats, and you all knew it or you wouldn't have stayed with this investment for so long (except for puplmusik who apparently had a druckenmiller moment...but sold! Seriously?!? Seriously...somebody check on him and make sure he/she is ok please).

So what do we know thus far? Let us take a quick peruse of the grant details:

De Novo Number	DEN250028
Device Name	DeepView AI® System
Requester	spectralmd, inc. 2515 mckinney ave. suite 1000 dallas,  TX  75201
Contact	trudy estridge
Classification Product Code	SHY
Date Received	06/27/2025
Decision Date	05/21/2026
Decision	granted (DENG)
Review Advisory Committee	General & Plastic Surgery
Type	Direct
Predetermined ChangeControl Plan Authorized	No

First the major win, Decision = granted (DENG) means we are go for commercialization. DeepView can be sold, the binary risk event is officially removed for the stock. Cheers!

Next, Uncle Sam gave us our own product code, SHY. The moat is now established, we own the space. Sure, anybody that wants to compete must file a 510(k) and show they are "substantially equivalent" but you all should know that is an extremely expensive and timely pipe dream - you need to train your model for ground truth on a large biopsied dataset and we all know how cheap that is, not!

And we aren't sharing, or maybe we will, but it will cost you -> money please!

Let's see decision date, about 11 months (like I told you) based on FDA's trend since shutdown - checks out.

Finally, the predetermined change control plan authorized, says no, crap, what does this mean? Sounds bad... Relax, it really isn't. It means Spectral AI can't simply make changes to the DeepView model and push software changes on the fly. Sorry this isn't your MMORPG or tiktok app. This is medical software, it needs a little more rigor than what those pampered FAANG engineers are accustomed to. This aligns with Capone's guidance last call when analysts asked about implications of the new features BARDA wants and label expansion. He said they simply file a 510(k), way less overhead, and should easily be granted in 30 days for minor changes and 90 to 150 for major label expansion. Again Spectral though has a great advantage on the turn around time because they own the product code now, they are the standard, proving they are "substantially equivalent" is mute - they are DeepView.

That about covers the facts we know for now until management discloses more. I think they were following a standard playbook of having held this news for Tuesday open because we were going into a holiday weekend. If they released it on Friday they could have dampen any rally. Happy to have helped with the previous intel if you weren't aware of these databases. Was a great real world example of how to find the arbitrage and how news like this can be slightly delayed in practice.

Congrats everyone, here is to an exciting week ahead!

För er som lyssnade på mig och köpte aktier i Spectral AI har redan tjänat pengar de senaste månaden. Nu kom FDA godkännandet och med det skapas nya möjligheter för aktien att rusa.

Link to FDA approval - https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/denovo.cfm?id=DEN250028

Hola retardados,

I've done some DD on a company trending right now, and I may have figured out a scam/trick an hedge fund is pulling off. Would like to share my findings and have opinions on how to play this.

The hedge fund in question is Hudson Bay Capital (HBC). According to Fintel, they have about $8.2B in AUM.

I cannot mention the company, as:

- based on quick calculations, they never reached the $1.5B market cap threshold, and are hence (appropriately) qualified per WSB rules as "worthless securities that are susceptible to scams or pump & dump schemes".

- otherwise every single person on WSB would load up on puts or do whatever shit.

Anyway, if you have minimal research skills you'll guess/find what I'm talking about.

I'll call it Company X for this post. Company X has no meaningful revenue, and does nothing but lose money. In the management team, there's a guy who recently settled for fraud, for his involvement in another company (which recently collapsed). The stock used to have a total market cap of ~$20M, right now, after massive dilution (5x O/S in a few months), shares are trading higher and the total market cap is ~$650M.

Company X has recently engaged in a flurry of M&A, spinoffs and whatever else, creating potential "catalysts". It's also heavily promoted by well known Twitter personalities. Not having the cash to fund such endeavors, they started issuing convertible notes.

And here Hudson Bay comes into play. The hedge fund offered hundreds of millions $ to Company X in convertible notes with short expiration (note: company revenue ~$2.5M). Other warrants have been offered to them and, to a lesser extent, to other firms.

As Company X doesn't make money, but spends a decent bit, they are now asking shareholders to approve early exercise of all warrants.

Very few warrants issued

Pointing out that, without that, the company would be in a tough situation (and realistically the M&A activities might be gone):

A little nudge on the vote

Hudson Bay Capital would have, including the convertible note, warrants for about 120M shares, which is more than the current O/S total (~100M). Dumping such truckload of shares wouldn't be feasible, with current volumes. Hence, I suspect they are pulling of a magic financial trick called

Warrant hedging

I know, what the hell is this, who the fuck trades warrants, etc. Warrants are basically call options, but they're issued by the company, hence the money would go straight to them if exercised. Warrant hedging means:

- you hold a warrant at $10

- you place a short at $20

- your position is hedged. No matter where the price goes, you locked in a risk free profit. It's also an unsqueezable short, since you can't get margin called.

The moment such warrants are exercised, you cash out of your position with $10 in profit, the company cashes in $10 from the warrant, and shareholders are left holding the bag.

There are a series of things that make me suspect such strategy is being employed. The first is that the SI has gone nowhere but up lately, despite the supposed "squeeze" and the subsequent tanking. It's worth noting that high SI has been recently attracting flocks of retail traders, hoping for squeeze profits. Price action would look manipulated: whenever the share price approaches the warrant level, volume dries up until there's a rebound, often "catalyst" triggered. Then huge volume, price goes flat/down, rinse and repeat.

HBC can place a de-facto risk free short anytime the price is above the warrants (lowest is $2.655). This leads to a situation in which they could, in principle, short a ton of Company X stock, wake up on the day after the early exercise is approved, and cover their position by exercising their warrants. No messed up price action, which they'd get if they were to dump their position, just a sudden spike in O/S.

There are a few instances in which this may not be the case:

- HBC actually plans to dump their position after early exercise is allowed. Whatever.

- HBC plans to hold >$700M, close to 10% of their portfolio, in a single low cap stock with no revenue and dubious management. This would dwarf their current largest positions ($INFO and $AAPL).

- shareholders vote against the proposal. This opens up a pandora box of deals falling apart, and potential default, for Company X.

Considering that, in principle, the last could happen and create some turbulence, and looking at a SI of ~20-25%, I would think HBC is employing this strategy for a decent chunk, but not all, of their holdings.

Last thing to note: the company has placed another "catalyst" (spinoff) one week after the vote, possibly to encourage retail not to offload their shares. This was originally planned for the day after the vote, but has since been postponed. It would help the hedge fund dump the rest of the shares.

The question now is: how do you play this shit?

I bought some puts, was swimming in the green, getting hammered this week. Would you think puts for the spinoff week would work? Puts for this Friday? A month from now?

And especially, could the warrant hedging just balloon the O/S without any meaningful price action when exercised? In which case, my puts would be fucked?

That's all, thanks for coming to my TED talk

tl;dr : the Hudson Bay Capital hedge fund is pulling off some serious fuckery