St. Jude Medical (STJ)

Carson C. Block · 2016-08
arc beats above · slides in the middle · loops below · scroll → 2 LOOPS
SETUP TENSION ANALYSIS EVIDENCE RESOLUTION APPENDIX
HOVER FOR DETAILS · CLICK A SLIDE FOR FULLSCREEN · STEP 2
No image bound to this slide. Wire up imgproxy to display the rendered slide JPEG.

Deck intelligence map

3
coverage by narrative range · generated from this deck JSON

Slide inventory

34
every slide · same image gating as the playbook
01
Slide 1
Standard legal boilerplate for investment research.other
02
The slide serves as the formal introduction to the short thesis, establishing the firm's position and the core argument regarding product recalls and cybersecurframe_situation
03
This is a text-heavy research note page. It discusses the collaboration between Muddy Waters and MedSec to expose security flaws in STJ devices.diagnose_problem
04
This is a disclosure/methodology page from a Muddy Waters research report regarding St. Jude Medical (STJ) device vulnerabilities.frame_situation
05
The slide highlights a lack of encryption and authentication across the ecosystem, framing it as a security vulnerability.frame_situation
06
The slide uses a diagram to show the connectivity between patient, home device, programmer, and network, followed by text arguing that STJ lacks standard securiexpose_contradiction
07
The slide highlights the ease of acquiring medical hardware that researchers have proven to be hackable from a distance of 50 feet.expose_contradiction
08
This slide details specific technical security failures found during research.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Problem (Identify pain)
09
The slide uses a 'root' access screenshot to prove the vulnerability of the device.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Problem (Identify pain)
10
The slide uses a confrontational tone to frame STJ as negligent in cybersecurity, citing a $6.4 billion potential liability.name_villain
11
The table highlights significant security vulnerabilities for STJ compared to competitors.compare_peers
12
The slide uses technical teardown evidence to argue for gross negligence in product design, citing potential litigation damages of $6.4 billion.expose_contradiction
13
The slide contains a screenshot of an eBay listing for a St Jude Medical MERLIN 3650 Patient Care System.illustrate_case
14
Includes a photograph of a disassembled device with a red box highlighting a 'Removable hard drive'.name_villain
15
This is a research note detailing cybersecurity vulnerabilities in medical devices.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate (Make it worse)
16
This slide serves as a descriptive narrative of a technical vulnerability, referencing a specific demonstration and expert interpretation.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate (Make it worse)
17
The slide includes a photograph of a St. Jude Medical device interface and a descriptive paragraph about a security vulnerability.illustrate_case
18
This page contains text from a research report regarding cybersecurity vulnerabilities in medical devices.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)
19
The text discusses the regulatory framework for medical device recalls and cybersecurity vulnerabilities, referencing specific FDA guidance documents.appendix
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)
20
The page is a continuation of a research note, focusing on risk assessment frameworks (CVSS 3.0 and ANSI/AAMI/ISO 14971).appendix
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)
21
The slide highlights a specific case study involving St. Jude Medical to demonstrate 'uncontrolled risk' in medical device security.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)
22
This page is a continuation of a research note, likely from a report by MedSec regarding St. Jude Medical (STJ) device security.appendix
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)
23
The slide uses a historical precedent (Hospira) to argue for the necessity of a recall for STJ devices based on similar cybersecurity risks.cite_precedent
Open slide detailLoop · Benchmark Gap
24
This page serves as a reference document with footnotes for a larger research report.appendix
Open slide detailLoop · Benchmark Gap
25
The chart appears to be a screenshot from a financial data terminal (e.g., Bloomberg).analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
26
The slide combines historical data for Boston Scientific with a forward-looking DCF sensitivity analysis for St. Jude Medical.analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
27
The slide outlines specific adjustments to management guidance for various segments (CRM, Heart Failure, AF, Cardiovascular, Neuromodulation) and financial metranalyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
28
Includes a line chart for revenue segments, a list of DCF assumptions, a data table for EPS/Revenue metrics, and a bar chart for Adj. EPS change.analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
29
The tables represent a sensitivity analysis for St. Jude Medical (STJ) based on a hypothetical market share loss scenario.analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
30
Includes four sensitivity tables and a paragraph detailing a bank loan covenant breach calculation.analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
31
The slide combines a formal financial compliance schedule with a qualitative assessment of credit risk and potential covenant renegotiation.diagnose_problem
32
The slide discusses financial leverage metrics (Debt/EBITDA) and their impact on credit ratings.diagnose_problem
33
Includes a footnote regarding Dr. Nayak's equity interest in MedSec.appendix
34
This is a formal letter/statement from a physician regarding medical device security.summarize