May. 2 at 1:16 AM
$NSPR At this point, in my opinion, Marvin is indefensible. The issue is not just the recall itself, but the judgment behind it. Why choose to enter the U.S. market with a delivery system that now appears to have been less proven operationally, while management had been speaking publicly about readiness, momentum, and a solid commercial foundation? That's the real credibility problem. The PR made it worse by mixing recall, strong demand, TCAR progress, and withdrawn guidance all in one message. And why wasn't the original CGuard delivery system—already proven in 70k+ cases worldwide—submitted for U.S. approval alongside the Prime as a Plan B? We're now looking at minimum 2Q with no U.S. product to sell, no ROI, just cash burn. If the Board wants to restore shareholder trust, accountability has to start at the top. Marvin out / Cohen in would be a real reset. And if Marvin remains in place, a meaningful reduction in 2026 compensation would be the bare minimum signal of accountability.
