|
|
Post by brentie on Sept 6, 2013 7:14:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Sept 6, 2013 7:32:11 GMT -5
From TheFlyOnTheWall:
"MannKind downgraded at BofA/Merrill
As previously reported, BofA/Merrill downgraded MannKind to Underperform from Neutral. The firm's physician survey indicates indicates an increased cautious stance following Afrezza Ph. III results for use in Type 2 diabetes patients on oral therapies. The firm lowered its peak share estimate to 2% of the oral market vs. 4% previously. Price target lowered to $5 from $8."
Manipulation if I've ever seen it - want a lower price target - just cut the market size in half. Their potential market was too low to begin with!
|
|
|
|
Post by rak5555 on Sept 6, 2013 8:27:27 GMT -5
Most likely, this survey was done after P3 but prior to MNKD Q/A response. If so, I wonder if their response would be different now.
This could suppress the PPS increase we anticipated from NDA filing and put even more at stake for partner agreement.
|
|
|
|
Post by swingtrader88 on Sept 6, 2013 8:48:08 GMT -5
I also, have done a very informal survey of 4 doctors and all 4 said they would consider Afrezza in early type 2 patients if it meant better compliance from their new diabetes patients. My price target is $23 upon approval early 2nd quarter 2014.
Get the word out.
Swing
|
|
|
|
Post by nemzter on Sept 6, 2013 9:02:07 GMT -5
I also, have done a very informal survey of 4 doctors and all 4 said they would consider Afrezza in early type 2 patients if it meant better compliance from their new diabetes patients. My price target is $23 upon approval early 2nd quarter 2014. Get the word out. Swing Double that for a buyout, but I'd be happy with either number though. Kind of ironic BOA sends this out the day that Deerfield conversion is due. |
|
|
|
Post by spiro on Sept 6, 2013 9:02:54 GMT -5
This survey smells very fishy to me. I wonder if the doctors were even shown all of the highlights of the type 2 study. Or were they told, BTW Exubera failed and Afrezza might cause a slight cough, therefore , you probably will not use it, right? Let's face it, potential partners will do their own legitimate surveys, to determine if their sales force can make Afrezza a winner.
|
|
|
|
Post by rak5555 on Sept 6, 2013 9:07:03 GMT -5
FWIW - my experience w/ downgrades is they have an immediate negative impact and then wear off quickly unless they are followed by new downgrades.
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Sept 6, 2013 9:21:55 GMT -5
I also, have done a very informal survey of 4 doctors and all 4 said they would consider Afrezza in early type 2 patients if it meant better compliance from their new diabetes patients. My price target is $23 upon approval early 2nd quarter 2014. Get the word out. Swing Swing, you have my vote - so 5 out of 5. |
|
|
|
Post by spiro on Sept 6, 2013 9:24:51 GMT -5
This was a meaningless survey with huge margin of error. Dang, I used to think p values were important. This survey would have a margin of error somewhere around 12 %. www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_ideas/Soc_participants.shtmlThe table below shows this estimate of the margin of error for sample sizes ranging from 10 to 10,000. (For more advanced students with an interest in statistics, the Creative Research Systems website (Creative Research Systems, 2003) has a more exact formula, along with a sample size calculator that you can use. For most purposes, though, the 1/√N approach is sufficient.) sample size (N) margin of error (fraction) margin of error (percentage) 10 0.316 31.6 20 0.224 22.4 50 0.141 14.1 100 0.100 10.0 200 0.071 7.1 500 0.045 4.5 1000 0.032 3.2 2000 0.022 2.2 5000 0.014 1.4 10000 0.010 1.0 You can quickly see from the table that results from a survey with only 10 random participants are not reliable. The margin of error in this case is roughly 32%. This means that if you found, for example, that 6 out of your 10 participants (60%) had a fear of heights, then the actual proportion of the population with a fear of heights could vary by ±32%. In other words, the actual proportion could be as low as 28% (60 - 32) and as high as 92% (60 + 32). With a range that large, your small survey isn't saying much. If you increase the sample size to 100 people, your margin of error falls to 10%. Now if 60% of the participants reported a fear of heights, there would be a 95% probability that between 50 and 70% of the total population have a fear of heights. Now you're getting somewhere. If you want to narrow the margin of error to ±5%, you have to survey 500 randomly-selected participants. The bottom line is, you need to survey a lot of people before you can start having any confidence in your results. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Sept 6, 2013 9:27:03 GMT -5
More noise, just louder this time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Sept 6, 2013 11:08:07 GMT -5
I also, have done a very informal survey of 4 doctors and all 4 said they would consider Afrezza in early type 2 patients if it meant better compliance from their new diabetes patients. My price target is $23 upon approval early 2nd quarter 2014. Get the word out. Swing Do you really think $23 is possible? That marketcap would be so aggressive and optimistic, IMO. Nemster, $46 if we get a partnership? I don't believe we'll get $46 if ever, can you care too elaborate behind your rational with figures? |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Sept 6, 2013 12:17:45 GMT -5
Chris, almost anything is possible, witness NFLX and TSLA, momentum stocks with great stories, but first, we need to have a suitably great story, and that would be at least an approval and a partner, but it may take increasing revenues as well. For now, the trading has to be based on the anticipation of these events, with the partnership being front and center and approval thereafter; I don't think filing the NDA is going to be much of a catalyst, heck, almost anyone can file...
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Sept 6, 2013 15:06:24 GMT -5
Chris, almost anything is possible, witness NFLX and TSLA, momentum stocks with great stories, but first, we need to have a suitably great story, and that would be at least an approval and a partner, but it may take increasing revenues as well. For now, the trading has to be based on the anticipation of these events, with the partnership being front and center and approval thereafter; I don't think filing the NDA is going to be much of a catalyst, heck, almost anyone can file... Thanks Baba, it's always good to hear from you. Filing may serve as a small catalyst if MNKD still hovers around these levels, IMO since I'm more than certain articles and blogs will start popping up reviewing Afrezza and it's potential. An NDA submission will further attract momentum and near term milestone investors too. |
|
|
|
Post by swingtrader88 on Sept 6, 2013 15:34:05 GMT -5
"Do you really think $23 is possible? That marketcap would be so aggressive and optimistic, IMO."
Chris,
I don't make price predictions usually. My comment was tongue in cheek and loosely based upon the article I read that brought up the BoA downgrade.
After watching DNDN reach $50+ on a minute market despite costly therapy, nothing would surprise me in biotech. If we spike into double digits I might be tempted to take some profits with the intention of re-investing at a lower price point once reality sets in.
Swing
|
|
|
|
Post by nemzter on Sept 6, 2013 15:59:59 GMT -5
I also, have done a very informal survey of 4 doctors and all 4 said they would consider Afrezza in early type 2 patients if it meant better compliance from their new diabetes patients. My price target is $23 upon approval early 2nd quarter 2014. Get the word out. Swing Do you really think $23 is possible? That marketcap would be so aggressive and optimistic, IMO. Nemster, $46 if we get a partnership? I don't believe we'll get $46 if ever, can you care too elaborate behind your rational with figures? $46 *double on buyout, not partnership My rationale is based on mostly hopes and dreams, as to many who have bought into this company believing in the technology and the capability to save millions of lives. |
|
/production/original_573352236.gif)
