Addressing the Top 5 FAQs About Neocore’s BCI (For Investors)
In our early conversations as we prepare to raise our pre-seed investment round, there are five main questions we’ve continued to get. I’d like to address those here.
#1. Are there FDA or regulatory concerns? What about liability and litigation from consumers?
No. Since we’re not deploying into medical environments, making diagnoses, nor sending a signal through the brain (only reading existing brainwaves), we’re clear from a regulatory perspective. Our early adopters will be avid wellness tech enthusiasts who are more interested in getting their hands on the hottest new thing than jumping to sue if something isn’t perfectly right. We’ll need to include liability disclosure in “the small print” of course, and we already have corporate counsel ready to go on the sidelines who will connect us to the right tech-specific firm to handle this.
#2. How will you go up against big tech players already patenting and building comparable BCI?
We don’t see any of The Big 5 as direct competitors as much as potential acquirers down the line. Our form factor itself isn’t as defensible as what is does. Our moat is really our proprietary AI algorithm. Moreover, it’s our system–“brainwave to tech to content” for a wellness application. That capability will be hard for anyone to duplicate especially given our experience being in the 100+ clinics we’re in now, using that data to inform our app, and having the wellness background we do. Any innovation in the category is a net positive for us.
#3. Why would a consumer buy your earbuds versus regular ones and wellness apps they already use?
Existing earbuds and wellness apps aren’t cognitively connected. And, these are separate products. Sure, apps like Calm, Headspace, or even YouTube adapt based on how you use them. But they don’t operate based on how you think–on what’s going on inside of the brain. That’s our big value prop: using your brainwave data to guide your app experience. If you just want regular old earbuds, go for it. Our earbuds are merely a conduit to enabling a completely “neuropersonalized” device experience.
#4. Making and selling hardware is a difficult road. Why not stick to (or start with) software?
We know scaling the hardware piece will require tact and smart execution. Two things here: one, we are not a hardware company. We’ll sell hardware, but the value is in the experience of customizing your device interaction based on EEG data. That’s our focus. But we need hardware to do that. Two: we’re not set in stone on the hardware piece. We’re open to pivoting and innovating away from hardware if we find we need to. Our vision is to create an ecosystem of products, not to be beholden to earbuds. We can license either software or hardware, sell the rights to the hardware side of the business, or eventually evolve to not needing the hardware component in the future. But for now, it’s the most economical, efficient, minimalist form factor to enable our application.
#5. You guys already have traction with clinics. Why not stick to B2B? Why pivot to consumer?
The market cap is limited for B2B–there’s only so many psychotherapy clinics doing so many EEG tests per year (an active one might perform 6,000 in a year). But there’s virtually no ceiling on growth potential for consumer wellness. By 2030, that market will be worth $7 trillion. Numbers alone support our decision to go the B2C route. Eventually, BCI will become mainstream. It may take 10-12-15 years to get there but a technology this pioneering and innovative will become mass adopted on a global scale just like the iPhone did. We’re aiming to lead that charge–we can built it, we can ship it, and we can market it.
Please reach out to me directly with any further questions or clarification! I am here to help! Stay tuned and subscribe for more!
~ Michael