|
Post by Clement on Dec 4, 2018 10:26:00 GMT -5
Today, the Bollinger bands continue to be contracted. Tight Bollinger bands are likened to a wound-up spring.
It's a great time for good news. Yes! Good news would release the spring to launch upwards.
Just a bit of chart fun! Now is a great time for good news, and it's a scary time for shorts.
|
|
|
Post by xanet on Dec 4, 2018 10:45:12 GMT -5
Today, the Bollinger bands continue to be contracted. Tight Bollinger bands are likened to a wound-up spring. It's a great time for good news. Yes! Good news would release the spring to launch upwards. Just a bit of chart fun! Now is a great time for good news, and it's a scary time for shorts. To add to the fun... Contracted Bollinger bands only tell you the spring is wound, not the direction of the launch. I took a peak at two other indicators, On Balance Volume and Chaikin Money Flow. These give an idea of whether shares are being bought (accumulated) or sold (distributed) while the bands are tightening. Happily for us, we are seeing accumulation (albeit on low volume). This suggests that a breakout to the upside is indeed more likely. Let the spring be wound!
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Dec 4, 2018 12:05:27 GMT -5
Today, the Bollinger bands continue to be contracted. Tight Bollinger bands are likened to a wound-up spring. It's a great time for good news. Yes! Good news would release the spring to launch upwards. Just a bit of chart fun! Now is a great time for good news, and it's a scary time for shorts. To add to the fun... Contracted Bollinger bands only tell you the spring is wound, not the direction of the launch. I took a peak at two other indicators, On Balance Volume and Chaikin Money Flow. These give an idea of whether shares are being bought (accumulated) or sold (distributed) while the bands are tightening. Happily for us, we are seeing accumulation (albeit on low volume). This suggests that a breakout to the upside is indeed more likely. Let the spring be wound! The longer there is no news, the more pressure there is for the price to go down. Positive news means there is a chance for the warrants to be exercised. Without news, the price will drift lower and if it gets to April, look for around $1.25 without news.
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Dec 8, 2018 23:47:47 GMT -5
I’d like to see Afrezza get a US partner, and the expense of the sales team transferred to who ever that is. Probably doesn't make much sense at this point, with weekly sales closing in on $1 million. Doubtful that Mannkind could get a better deal than it had with Sanofi, or even as good a deal given the history, which would mean giving up a lot of that revenue.
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Dec 8, 2018 23:57:45 GMT -5
There’s one more I’d like to see some news on and that is the Bluehale device. There’s an app on my iPad but haven’t seen or heard anything substantive about any submissions, availability, etc in eons. A lot of talk but that’s about it. It would be great to see the device released for use along with a managed care program. I don't see how BluHale has any great commercial potential. It's useful for Mannkind's own research and possibly for some forward-thinking clinicians as a training tool. Maybe some parents would want it to help teach their children how to use the inhalers properly. What beyond that?
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Dec 9, 2018 0:05:21 GMT -5
I am not sure how practical bluhale would be. There would need to be an equivalence trial as with the move from the old inhaler to dreamboat, and bluhale would have to be disposable or capable of being cleaned. That could all be done, but not in the short term. I'm not so sure of that. I believe it is an add-on to the current inhaler. Meaning, you just snap it on to a new inhaler when you switch them out. Right. See Mannkind's description of BluHale: www.mannkindcorp.com/research-development/tech-platforms/inhalation-profiling/. Doesn't seem like something a typical user would need.
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Dec 9, 2018 7:30:53 GMT -5
Mike Castagna said in the past that a U.S. partner was desired to sell Afrezza because the size of the current sales force (maybe somewhere between 80 and 110?) was insufficient to achieve the long-term results desired. A sales force of 300 or 400 is needed. The fact that one has not yet been announced could mean one of a number of things. It could mean one is waiting to see a certain level of sales and escalation to prove market acceptance before stepping in. It could mean one is waiting on Afrezza to be designated SOC or approved for children. It could mean there are no desired partners interested. It could mean Mannkind would rather work the pipeline and continue going alone than pay the heavy price tag being requested. Mike is smart and won't make the same mistake made with Sanofi. IMO, an announcement for a strong U.S. partner is coming. I'm hopeful it will be in time to be effective in 2019. I trust Mike's got this and will make the move when the time is right and the deal is right.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Dec 9, 2018 8:15:34 GMT -5
The size of the Afrezza salesforce is not the critical factor. If simply expanding the sales force would generate profits, MannKind would have done it already. I think the advantage of partnering with a BP company is that they have leverage with insurers, PBMs and 3rd party payers. The leverage comes from bundling rebates on many brands with large aggregate sales. There is also a risk that the partner may intentionally scuttle Afrezza (while claiming "we tried!") if successfully growing Afrezza would damage sales of their other diabetes drugs. To address this risk, MannKind must partner with a BP that has bargaining power but no large selling oral diabetes med or insulin.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Dec 9, 2018 9:00:21 GMT -5
The size of the Afrezza salesforce is not the critical factor. If simply expanding the sales force would generate profits, MannKind would have done it already. I think the advantage of partnering with a BP company is that they have leverage with insurers, PBMs and 3rd party payers. The leverage comes from bundling rebates on many brands with large aggregate sales. There is also a risk that the partner may intentionally scuttle Afrezza (while claiming "we tried!") if successfully growing Afrezza would damage sales of their other diabetes drugs. To address this risk, MannKind must partner with a BP that has bargaining power but no large selling oral diabetes med or insulin. Amgen?
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Dec 9, 2018 12:40:27 GMT -5
The size of the Afrezza salesforce is not the critical factor. If simply expanding the sales force would generate profits, MannKind would have done it already. I think the advantage of partnering with a BP company is that they have leverage with insurers, PBMs and 3rd party payers. The leverage comes from bundling rebates on many brands with large aggregate sales. There is also a risk that the partner may intentionally scuttle Afrezza (while claiming "we tried!") if successfully growing Afrezza would damage sales of their other diabetes drugs. To address this risk, MannKind must partner with a BP that has bargaining power but no large selling oral diabetes med or insulin. I suspect that a pharma with no presence in the diabetes market would not be interested. Someone with non-insulin diabetes drugs would be a better fit. Realistically the SOC isn't changing any time soon so if there is the potential to retain patients when they move to bolus insulin then I think there could be interest. The vast majority of diabetics in the US never make it to insulin today so for a non-insulin pharma there would not be a big threat to existing sales.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Dec 9, 2018 14:09:22 GMT -5
Mike Castagna said in the past that a U.S. partner was desired to sell Afrezza because the size of the current sales force (maybe somewhere between 80 and 110?) was insufficient to achieve the long-term results desired. A sales force of 300 or 400 is needed. The fact that one has not yet been announced could mean one of a number of things. It could mean one is waiting to see a certain level of sales and escalation to prove market acceptance before stepping in. It could mean one is waiting on Afrezza to be designated SOC or approved for children. It could mean there are no desired partners interested. It could mean Mannkind would rather work the pipeline and continue going alone than pay the heavy price tag being requested. Mike is smart and won't make the same mistake made with Sanofi. IMO, an announcement for a strong U.S. partner is coming. I'm hopeful it will be in time to be effective in 2019. I trust Mike's got this and will make the move when the time is right and the deal is right. When was this? Recently (last conference call)? Or over a year ago? I'm not doubting he said it, but he has said a number of things at various different times in the past. Some of which would speak against having a U.S. partner.
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Dec 9, 2018 14:22:13 GMT -5
The size of the Afrezza salesforce is not the critical factor. If simply expanding the sales force would generate profits, MannKind would have done it already. I think the advantage of partnering with a BP company is that they have leverage with insurers, PBMs and 3rd party payers. The leverage comes from bundling rebates on many brands with large aggregate sales. There is also a risk that the partner may intentionally scuttle Afrezza (while claiming "we tried!") if successfully growing Afrezza would damage sales of their other diabetes drugs. To address this risk, MannKind must partner with a BP that has bargaining power but no large selling oral diabetes med or insulin. I suspect that a pharma with no presence in the diabetes market would not be interested. Someone with non-insulin diabetes drugs would be a better fit. Realistically the SOC isn't changing any time soon so if there is the potential to retain patients when they move to bolus insulin then I think there could be interest. The vast majority of diabetics in the US never make it to insulin today so for a non-insulin pharma there would not be a big threat to existing sales. It looks like the SOC for 2018 was either evaluated or changed around 12/7/17. Are you saying the SOC for 2019 has already been set ? I couldn’t find anything for 2019 www.diabetes.org/newsroom/press-releases/2017/american-diabetes-association-2018-release-standards-of-medical-care-in-diabetes.htmlBecause if it hasn’t been set for 2019 yet, I would think it could be at anytime now. thanks aged 😎
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Dec 10, 2018 6:53:07 GMT -5
Mike's comment about the importance of a larger sales team was probably a year ago. IMO, as the past year has evolved and Dr. Kendall has come on board, management has recognized that several things need to happen to reach the lofty goals everyone wants. This includes SOC, approval for youth, improved insurance coverage, proof of market acceptance, etc. This doesn't change the need for a larger sales force than Mannkind alone can afford but it does change the timing. My point is that knowing Mike said this means it likely remains an important objective. Because of this, my "guess" is that Mike is having ongoing discussions with a particular BP about this, but they have obviously not yet made the decision to make this leap. They could be waiting on milestones to trigger such a move. Considering what happened with Sanofi, this would be wise. I believe a much improved partnership is coming and will likely be in effect sometime in 2019. Anytime would be a great time for such news.
|
|
|
Post by golfeveryday on Dec 10, 2018 8:22:56 GMT -5
Mike's comment about the importance of a larger sales team was probably a year ago. IMO, as the past year has evolved and Dr. Kendall has come on board, management has recognized that several things need to happen to reach the lofty goals everyone wants. This includes SOC, approval for youth, improved insurance coverage, proof of market acceptance, etc. This doesn't change the need for a larger sales force than Mannkind alone can afford but it does change the timing. My point is that knowing Mike said this means it likely remains an important objective. Because of this, my "guess" is that Mike is having ongoing discussions with a particular BP about this, but they have obviously not yet made the decision to make this leap. They could be waiting on milestones to trigger such a move. Considering what happened with Sanofi, this would be wise. I believe a much improved partnership is coming and will likely be in effect sometime in 2019. Anytime would be a great time for such news. ‘gearing up for 2019’. 👍🏻
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Dec 10, 2018 17:13:23 GMT -5
Mike Castagna said in the past that a U.S. partner was desired to sell Afrezza because the size of the current sales force (maybe somewhere between 80 and 110?) was insufficient to achieve the long-term results desired. A sales force of 300 or 400 is needed. The fact that one has not yet been announced could mean one of a number of things. It could mean one is waiting to see a certain level of sales and escalation to prove market acceptance before stepping in. It could mean one is waiting on Afrezza to be designated SOC or approved for children. It could mean there are no desired partners interested. It could mean Mannkind would rather work the pipeline and continue going alone than pay the heavy price tag being requested. Mike is smart and won't make the same mistake made with Sanofi. IMO, an announcement for a strong U.S. partner is coming. I'm hopeful it will be in time to be effective in 2019. I trust Mike's got this and will make the move when the time is right and the deal is right. When was this? Recently (last conference call)? Or over a year ago? I'm not doubting he said it, but he has said a number of things at various different times in the past. Some of which would speak against having a U.S. partner. "but he (Mike) has said a number of things at various different times in the past." Like all the rest of us?
|
|