|
|
Post by falconquest on Oct 14, 2018 8:46:42 GMT -5
I have said for years , this is more a 60 mins story. An investigational story of money, corruption, and science , along with hopefully a happy š ENDING. Except MS who wrote that letter to FDA.. everything else is a by product of how the company was run by its officers. Can you elaborate your corruption theory - I would love to hear.
The Mannkind story smells really bad. You had to be there to fully comprehend the complexities of the situation. Margaret Hamburg was totally corrupt and I believe under investigation at one point if memory serves. It would take hours to recount the story behind Mannkind & Afrezza. If you want to understand it I suggest you do some research. Take a look at Maggie, her husband, his position and where his interests were. Shkreli was a rat big time and is now in prison. There is definitely a story here, a big story. It was Sanofi's change in CEO's that led to the pitiful way they handled the partnership. I believe it was their intent to deep six Afrezza under Brandicourt's leadership. |
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Oct 14, 2018 9:05:12 GMT -5
I agree with sanofi as well / if mike can get this to work on a shoestring budget ,and I think he will ! Then sanofi must of had an alternative motive / a lot at stake
|
|
|
|
Post by pat on Oct 14, 2018 9:24:05 GMT -5
Agree with all but the Sanofi angle. I donāt think they intentionally wanted to kill Afrezza. I think Brandicourt took over and just killed the program because of his prior experience with exurba. Ultimately heāll be seen as an empty suit. I imagine heās making millions and obviously no more enlightened than any middle manager would be in his position.
Itās like all the nefarious cr@p that happens in the market - and has happened for hundreds of years - has played a part in this little biotech story over the years.
For example, whomever LFD is they are obviously bright and highly educated. The stuff they come up with is very creative - albeit completely false and missleading. Iām sure thereās some kind of hedge fund behind it. Thereās no difference behind what they are doing and whatās described in the classic āconfessions of a stock operatorā.
Iām not a black ops conspiracy guy but I have to believe that novo and lily arenāt above manipulating the system so that Afrezza does not get sold or covered. I donāt confess to understand how the health care system works. But there is something there. However I doubt they are messing with the market or funding the short position outright.
All of this can be picked apart and stitched together if thereās $$ funding the work to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Oct 14, 2018 10:13:49 GMT -5
Agree with all but the Sanofi angle. I donāt think they intentionally wanted to kill Afrezza. I think Brandicourt took over and just killed the program because of his prior experience with exurba. Ultimately heāll be seen as an empty suit. I imagine heās making millions and obviously no more enlightened than any middle manager would be in his position. Itās like all the nefarious cr@p that happens in the market - and has happened for hundreds of years - has played a part in this little biotech story over the years. For example, whomever LFD is they are obviously bright and highly educated. The stuff they come up with is very creative - albeit completely false and missleading. Iām sure thereās some kind of hedge fund behind it. Thereās no difference behind what they are doing and whatās described in the classic āconfessions of a stock operatorā. Iām not a black ops conspiracy guy but I have to believe that novo and lily arenāt above manipulating the system so that Afrezza does not get sold or covered. I donāt confess to understand how the health care system works. But there is something there. However I doubt they are messing with the market or funding the short position outright. All of this can be picked apart and stitched together if thereās $$ funding the work to do so. Viehbacher's bet was that Sanofi could walk and chew gum and that might have held. What blew it up and formed a major part in getting him fired was the the performance of the diabetes group, and a very pessimistic statement on Lantus (proposing major layoffs in France was the killer). It meant that when Brandicourt came in he needed to concentrate resources on minimizing the damage of Lantus coming off patent at all costs. Those resources had to come from somewhere and part of that was Afrezza which was not hitting targets. In another time Sanofi would have committed more resources to selling Afrezza, but at that point Lantus/Toujeo was far more important and swallowed all the money. Once it was decided that the extra cash required to make Afrezza a success could not be committed then killing the agreement becomes the obvious course (why waste money on a product you cannot properly fund). Novo and Lilly manipulate the system, but it has nothing to do with Afrezza. The manipulation is all about the fight for market share with each other. At this point and in the near future Afrezza is a rounding error in their sales as evidenced by their pricing. The COGS is so low at this point that they could drop the price a factor of 10 and still be making money and that would be how they put Afrezza out of business if it ever became necessary. They would even be the good guys in doing that if framed correctly (making insulin affordable) LFD is obsessed with Mannkind, and not in a good way. At this point it's a personal crusade for him and he isn't about to let go. He is Mortimer Duke at the end of Trading Places manically screaming," TURN THE MACHINES BACK ON" ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPZn4rbiB8g) |
|
|
|
Post by pat on Oct 14, 2018 10:24:59 GMT -5
The learned one has spoken
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Oct 14, 2018 11:59:03 GMT -5
The learned one has spoken So where do you think I went wrong and why? (I am flattered that you see me as the learned one, but I think you are mistaken  ) |
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Oct 14, 2018 15:38:11 GMT -5
Agree with all but the Sanofi angle. I donāt think they intentionally wanted to kill Afrezza. I think Brandicourt took over and just killed the program because of his prior experience with exurba. Ultimately heāll be seen as an empty suit. I imagine heās making millions and obviously no more enlightened than any middle manager would be in his position. Itās like all the nefarious cr@p that happens in the market - and has happened for hundreds of years - has played a part in this little biotech story over the years. For example, whomever LFD is they are obviously bright and highly educated. The stuff they come up with is very creative - albeit completely false and missleading. Iām sure thereās some kind of hedge fund behind it. Thereās no difference behind what they are doing and whatās described in the classic āconfessions of a stock operatorā. Iām not a black ops conspiracy guy but I have to believe that novo and lily arenāt above manipulating the system so that Afrezza does not get sold or covered. I donāt confess to understand how the health care system works. But there is something there. However I doubt they are messing with the market or funding the short position outright. All of this can be picked apart and stitched together if thereās $$ funding the work to do so. Viehbacher's bet was that Sanofi could walk and chew gum and that might have held. What blew it up and formed a major part in getting him fired was the the performance of the diabetes group, and a very pessimistic statement on Lantus (proposing major layoffs in France was the killer). It meant that when Brandicourt came in he needed toĀ concentrate resources on minimizing the damage of Lantus coming off patent at all costs. Those resources had to come from somewhere and part of that was Afrezza which was not hitting targets. In another time Sanofi would have committed more resources to selling Afrezza, but at that point Lantus/Toujeo was far more important and swallowed all the money. Once it was decided that the extra cash required to make Afrezza a success could not be committed then killing the agreement becomes the obvious course (why waste money on a product you cannot properly fund). Novo and Lilly manipulate the system, but it has nothing to do with Afrezza. The manipulation is all about the fight for market share with each other. At this point and in the near future Afrezza is a rounding error in their sales as evidenced by their pricing. The COGS is so low at this point that they could drop the price a factor of 10 and still be making money and that would be how they put Afrezza out of business if it ever became necessary. They would even be the good guys in doing that if framed correctly (making insulin affordable) LFD is obsessed with Mannkind, and not in a good way. At this point it's a personal crusade for him and he isn't about to let go. He is Mortimer Duke at the end of Trading Places manically screaming," TURN THE MACHINES BACK ON" ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPZn4rbiB8g) Iām not familiar with what Novo or Lillyās COGS are? Dropping a factor of ten would be huge. What is their actual costs of goods sold to net sales of their mealtime insulin ratio? And I suppose for that matter, what is MNKDās current COGS to net sales ratio of Afrezza? |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Oct 14, 2018 16:51:40 GMT -5
Iām not familiar with what Novo or Lillyās COGS are? Dropping a factor of ten would be huge. What is their actual costs of goods sold to net sales of their mealtime insulin ratio? And I suppose for that matter, what is MNKDās current COGS to net sales ratio of Afrezza? There was an article breaking down the COGS for insulin the other day in Stat (linked via publication in Business Insider) Insulin prices could be much lower and drug makers would still make healthy profits which is a lot more readable that the paper it is based on in the BMJ Global Health, Production costs and potential prices for biosimilars of human insulin and insulin analogues. The BMJ journals have a good reputation. As to pricing - a pack of 5 RAA pens costs Ā£28.31 in the UK (roughly $38) and $563 from GoodRx in the US which is comfortably more than a factor of 10! I have no idea what the COGS for Afrezza since Mannkind buys Regular insulin as an API and has further manufacturing cost I have no idea where the COGS lands. It does illustrate a point I continually go on about over international expansion - the selling price and hence the profit margin is a small fraction of the US. I use about 7 boxes of pens a year which if we take the UK price is about $266 per year, the article puts the top end of production cost at $133 per year per patient. That looks about right to me, if anything it suggests that the production cost is lower. |
|
|
|
Post by tomtabb on Oct 14, 2018 21:01:55 GMT -5
Does anyone know, if Liquidia were to file an objection with the FTC to the deal, would it be publicly announced?
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Oct 15, 2018 7:48:20 GMT -5
Iām not familiar with what Novo or Lillyās COGS are? Dropping a factor of ten would be huge. What is their actual costs of goods sold to net sales of their mealtime insulin ratio? And I suppose for that matter, what is MNKDās current COGS to net sales ratio of Afrezza? I don't know the exact answer, but the gross profit margins on many "old" drugs is substantially north of 90%, and for many small molecule drugs it is north of 95%. I once worked for a major company in the industry that had product that sold very well and carried a 96% gross margin; quite literally the packaging cost more than the drug inside. We sold that division after a major merger when we thought that business had peaked commercially (we were only charging patients about $75 per year for the drug), but last time I looked, that same drug now costs over $500 per year so the gross margin must be close to 99% at this point. Given the rate of price increase in RAI drugs in the past ten years, I have no doubt that Lilly and Novo could drop prices by an order of magnitude and still be profitable. As for Afrezza, the gross margin remains negative (i.e. it costs more to produce a unit than what it sells for). For the first six months of this year, the cost of goods were $9.1 million while sales were just $7.2 million. Due to the magnitude of asset write downs and reserves taken against the bulk insulin at the end of fiscal 2015, the true "apples to apples" cost of sales would be even higher since the 2015 write-off reduced the carrying cost of the plant and the bulk insulin is carried at a cost less than replacement value. Going the other direction, a portion of cost of sales is fixed charges for manufacturing overhead and depreciation that would not increase substantially if sales increased, but since the company does not break that out in the financials it is only a guess what part of current costs are fixed, semi-fixed, and variable. Suffice it to say that if sales increased by a factor of ten, cost of sales would increase by a factor somewhat less than ten, and that the gross margin would likely turn from negative to positive. What it does show is that MNKD is not in a good place if the competition want to maintain market share. When a company is struggling to generate a positive gross margin at the same time that its main competitors could reduce prices by 90% and still be profitable, that is not a viable long-term competitive position unless its product is so overwhelmingly superior that price doesn't matter. Afrezza has yet to make a strong enough case for product superiority to overcome its inferior production economics. |
|
|
|
Post by Clement on Oct 15, 2018 8:09:40 GMT -5
Iām not familiar with what Novo or Lillyās COGS are? Dropping a factor of ten would be huge. What is their actual costs of goods sold to net sales of their mealtime insulin ratio? And I suppose for that matter, what is MNKDās current COGS to net sales ratio of Afrezza? I don't know the exact answer, but the gross profit margins on many "old" drugs is substantially north of 90%, and for many small molecule drugs it is north of 95%. I once worked for a major company in the industry that had product that sold very well and carried a 96% gross margin; quite literally the packaging cost more than the drug inside. We sold that division after a major merger when we thought that business had peaked commercially (we were only charging patients about $75 per year for the drug), but last time I looked, that same drug now costs over $500 per year so the gross margin must be close to 99% at this point. Given the rate of price increase in RAI drugs in the past ten years, I have no doubt that Lilly and Novo could drop prices by an order of magnitude and still be profitable. As for Afrezza, the gross margin remains negative (i.e. it costs more to produce a unit than what it sells for). For the first six months of this year, the cost of goods were $9.1 million while sales were just $7.2 million. Due to the magnitude of asset write downs and reserves taken against the bulk insulin at the end of fiscal 2015, the true "apples to apples" cost of sales would be even higher since the 2015 write-off reduced the carrying cost of the plant and the bulk insulin is carried at a cost less than replacement value. Going the other direction, a portion of cost of sales is fixed charges for manufacturing overhead and depreciation that would not increase substantially if sales increased, but since the company does not break that out in the financials it is only a guess what part of current costs are fixed, semi-fixed, and variable. Suffice it to say that if sales increased by a factor of ten, cost of sales would increase by a factor somewhat less than ten, and that the gross margin would likely turn from negative to positive. What it does show is that MNKD is not in a good place if the competition want to maintain market share. When a company is struggling to generate a positive gross margin at the same time that its main competitors could reduce prices by 90% and still be profitable, that is not a viable long-term competitive position unless its product is so overwhelmingly superior that price doesn't matter. Afrezza has yet to make a strong enough case for product superiority to overcome its inferior production economics. I'm calling BS on that. You are leaving out all the overhead items that get tacked onto manufacturing cost. |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Oct 15, 2018 9:04:36 GMT -5
What it does show is that MNKD is not in a good place if the competition want to maintain market share. When a company is struggling to generate a positive gross margin at the same time that its main competitors could reduce prices by 90% and still be profitable, that is not a viable long-term competitive position unless its product is so overwhelmingly superior that price doesn't matter. Afrezza has yet to make a strong enough case for product superiority to overcome its inferior production economics. I'm calling BS on that. You are leaving out all the overhead items that get tacked onto manufacturing cost. UK cost of a pack of Novolog pens to the NHS is $38 (it's free to the patient), the US price is $563. They will still be making a profit even at the $38 price so they could easily reduce their prices by 90%. |
|
|
|
Post by Clement on Oct 15, 2018 9:33:31 GMT -5
I'm calling BS on that. You are leaving out all the overhead items that get tacked onto manufacturing cost. UK cost of a pack of Novolog pens to the NHS is $38 (it's free to the patient), the US price is $563. They will still be making a profit even at the $38 price so they could easily reduce their prices by 90%. you know that for a fact? |
|
|
|
Post by InvesterSam on Oct 15, 2018 10:10:26 GMT -5
UK cost of a pack of Novolog pens to the NHS is $38 (it's free to the patient), the US price is $563. They will still be making a profit even at the $38 price so they could easily reduce their prices by 90%. you know that for a fact? I do not know exact profit Novolog or other companies. Will they do that to protect few hundred million dollar market share that MNKD will take for now? They will loose multiple of few hundred million dollars by doing it. |
|
|
|
Post by jkendra on Oct 15, 2018 10:34:06 GMT -5
Be careful. Last time there was a thread on corruption proboards went down and posts were deleted. Also that was the last day Kastanes posted.
|
|
)