Pretty obvious to see the viability of this product in the hair transplant industry, which is a mult-billion dollar industry itself. You already have these patients investing $10k+ to maintain their hair, an extra $1500 for a yearly cell based therapy to maintain their results is an easy sell. They already do this with PRP and it’s way less promising and exciting as a therapy.
Is this the next Keytruda? Obviously not, but it’s potential is enough to help sustain a small biotechs program, which includes another potential indication that can be sold by the same sales force to similar doctors (mostly derms / cosmetic surgeons).
No. A product that would exist only in Asia and, in its present state, only maintains hair for a few months and requires a biopsy is not viable. Especially not when a pill is on the market that can sustain hair for many years, if not indefinitely.
"but muuuuh" No. You mistake the desperation of certain demographics willingness to pay for anything with "viability".
First off, there is nothing on paper (market research) showing that enough of the population would be willing/able to pay for this. Secondly, even if they did, it doesn't matter anyway; they cannot continuously administer the treatment and the cost of doing so would far exceed finasteride, transplants, etc. in a pretty short amount of time.
Consider that Aderans' technology, a decade ago, was able to maintain hair indefinitely and still was scrapped.