|
Post by lennymnkd on May 10, 2018 17:37:15 GMT -5
Aged there is a great amount of responsibility that goes along with managing diabetes correctly, I would rather give the patients the benefit of the doubt/ but it seems you are insinuating there is a certain demographic or class of patients who will not comply ! Should those numbers be build into revenue numbers ... lowering patient population and market share
|
|
|
Post by liane on May 10, 2018 17:45:51 GMT -5
agedhippie - While I generally appreciate your 1st hand knowledge of living with diabetes, I would caution you against extrapolating your experiences to all diabetics.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 10, 2018 18:01:18 GMT -5
Aged there is a great amount of responsibility that goes along with managing diabetes correctly, I would rather give the patients the benefit of the doubt/ but it seems you are insinuating there is a certain demographic or class of patients who will not comply ! Should those numbers be build into revenue numbers ... lowering patient population and market share Non compliance is a big issue in diabetes. That's not merely insinuation, it's observed by clinicians and discussed widely. An open question is whether compliance with Afrezza might be better than it is with RAA. Aged seems to think not (reading between the lines). Others believe it might have that potential.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2018 18:35:42 GMT -5
Spencer is strictly a numbers guy. He does NOT understand the science but at times he claims he does. That in my opinion greatly diminishes the accuracy (so far) of his forecasts as he shows ignorance and bias. I can tell you with certainty, Osborne understand diabetes and medicine. Osborne is in the market to make money, he writes for traders. While he is harsh, his modeling is precise. If you disagree don't read his articles, no need to assail his character.
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on May 10, 2018 18:36:49 GMT -5
That is an interesting suggestion and goes to a wider problem. First, stacking is not an issue provided you do it properly. Stacking is a problem if you just blindly bolus without accounting for insulin onboard, and that is the case with any insulin. Second you are told to check and correct after two hours which means stacking RAA. The reason people don't do that is not because they are scared of stacking insulin, it's because they cannot be bothered to disrupt whatever they are doing to test and correct. Meters even have alarms built into them to remind you to test (nobody enables the alarms...) Right now you are seeing CGM shots from people who are using Afrezza properly. What happens when you start getting broader uptake and the patients cannot be bothered to disrupt whatever they are doing to take the follow up dose? Is the fact that they don't get the results you expect their fault or Afrezza? If it is their fault then why isn't it their fault when they do that with RAA? Good grief man - "The reason people don't do that is not because they are scared of stacking insulin, it's because they cannot be bothered". Maybe you are better than most at stacking RAA but most people are scared. First high, then low, then really low then high, its better to let it go and re-baseline at the next meal. You ask the question "What happens when you start getting broader uptake and the patients cannot be bothered... to take the follow up dose. The answer is the 171 trial results. Not only didn't they take the follow-ups some took it 10-15 minutes before the meal. The 171 results where not bad and a simple adjustment would have been to wait until 10 minutes into the meal. Larger dosing would also address better results especially with the T2 who have little chance of a severe hypo. Of course with the follow-up they can hit near non-diabetic TIR. In the case of afrezza you can fine tune TIR. If the PWD does not take advantage of that ability, its their fault. RAAs do not provide the fine tuning option and in that case its the insulin. Its too damn slow. You can only blame the PWD for not demanding afrezza.
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on May 10, 2018 20:31:05 GMT -5
So far people have not paid the price of Afrezza, not has the general community of Endocronologists have joined the bandwagon yet. Yes I look at this as an investment, I would invest long term in MNKD if it would go through a chapter 11 reorganization and get rid of the the toxic balance sheet items. Until then this is a bad investment. I'm asking this question honestly. Why are you on the board then? If you are not invested and don't plan on investing unless MNKD goes through Ch. 11 reorganization, why are you on this board every day? I couldn't imagine taking that much time out of my day if I wasn't invested and didn't care about the science. What am I missing? MI am on here for closure of a five digit loss going long being a newbie investor and buying the hype. My fault for listening. I know through some private discussions I have helped others close positions that would be expiring worthless, so I do some good. It really is not much time, I can't take my eyes off the train wreck, and at times I have made a bit back from my loss going long and short for a few hours or days.
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on May 10, 2018 20:40:13 GMT -5
I'm asking this question honestly. Why are you on the board then? If you are not invested and don't plan on investing unless MNKD goes through Ch. 11 reorganization, why are you on this board every day? I couldn't imagine taking that much time out of my day if I wasn't invested and didn't care about the science. What am I missing? He is shorting the stock. Or day trading swings. The short position is counting on bankruptcy so that they will never have to buy to cover their short position. So instead of cheering for MannKind’s success, he is hoping for failure. Thus we see a constant negative spin on everything, even the most positive news. Just like Digger and others. However, in some ways they are helpful to longs, because it helps us to see what the short side is seeing and thinking. Is the long premise stronger or the short reasoning correct? Obviously I firmly believe that the strong science behind Afrezza will ultimately win. While I occasionally do a day trade short, it is not feasable for a retail investor to short MNKD overnight. Interest expenses would eat up potential profits and my broker was charging 1.74 cents per share to hold overnight. Over the last year, I have held long positions overnight up to a few weeks. I am diabetic so I have no rooting interest in seeing the stock go to zero. I hope it catches on, but perma bulls on this board do need to be responded too. I am still waiting for that shipment to the UAE to arrive, by now it may be past shelf life.
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on May 10, 2018 20:50:14 GMT -5
Aged there is a great amount of responsibility that goes along with managing diabetes correctly, I would rather give the patients the benefit of the doubt/ but it seems you are insinuating there is a certain demographic or class of patients who will not comply ! Should those numbers be build into revenue numbers ... lowering patient population and market share Non compliance is a big issue in diabetes. That's not merely insinuation, it's observed by clinicians and discussed widely. An open question is whether compliance with Afrezza might be better than it is with RAA. Aged seems to think not (reading between the lines). Others believe it might have that potential. and that's a BINGO!! for those that are defensive of SO and are upset that we may be hurting his feelings, one simple response: HE BRINGS IT ON HIMSELF with ridiculous statements such as below: Spencer Osborne, Contributor Comments (14438) |+ Follow |Send Message | Author’s reply » and so it continues..... "How can they pay the price when 98% of the PWD population still aren't aware of it?" Do you really believe that? Really? Yes absolutely, not only do I believe it I think you should try asking some when you run into them, it might just open your eyes and way of thinking. Think about this. MannKind has had this product back for TWO YEARS and in that time management has been unable to increase awareness? Well if the providers aren't telling them about it then why would you find it hard to believe, certainly you don't think that the DTC in certain test regions did the trick do you? Wait a minute, you actually believe that the increase in scripts was a direct correlation to the DTC advertising...lol, you think the short time frame that it aired without a corresponding increase in insurance coverage would have any meaningful impact? I give no credit to the DTC advertising for any coincidental increase in scripts NADA. Sure it may have raised a few questions in practitioners offices but that is most likely where it started and ended. Something is very wrong with that picture. This is the most accurate statement you've made and yes something is very wrong with the picture but then again there are many things wrong with the overall history of this picture."As for the Endo's that haven't joined the bandwagon yet, MC: We believe the complete dataset when you look at the hypoglycemia plus STAT plus the history of the safety and efficacy of this product across the 65 trials, we start to educate the physicians on all the data we have, and they're very responsive." Wishful thinking and $3.50 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Ok we shall see how that plays out"(again, why the STAT combined with the superiority regarding hypo's along with the rest of what MC states carries much more weight than what the ignorant one thinks). " OK wise man.....Lets put you on the spot. DEFINE MUCH MORE WEIGHT. What will net revenue be at the end of Q2? Q3? Q4? I could hypothesize on that but at any given time something from left field may happen to massively change it, for all I know maybe Jeff Bezos nephew gets diagnosed as a T1 and comes across Afrezza and brings it to his uncles attention, and maybe he is underage and has to get it off label, let me ask you, how would that change your projections. (This is absolutely an extreme example of something that could drastically affect the current landscape) but the point is that models are all well and good until they are not. "Oh ok, guess when the company sells "at the market" if doesn't help them and it isn't funding the company?" Did you buy those? Indirectly I bought the option to at lower prices. Do most investors buy those? NOPE....Look up the meaning of the word MOST "Your own words and inference/thesis is that is going to be a funding vehicle for them going forward to deal with cash needs. Obviously those shares are getting "soaked up"" Those shares get soaked up, and you as an investor get diluted. Are you helping diabetoics? NOPE AS MANY AS I CAN... "yes, and the short position remains close to record levels." The short position is where it is for many reasons. Think about how Wall Street works. Those player that soak up the ATM offerings short the stock. Ok we've been down this road before, if that were the case then why wouldn't they cover at close to zero? Still have yet to get a well thought out reasonable answer (I suspect because there isn't one They must be anti-diabetic right? ? Most likely with the exception of possibly those the likes of a David Kliff type"Your opinion, and fyi there are many institutional funds that invest with "moral compass" and therefore never would invest in tobacco companies, companies revolving around the porn industry, gaming, spirits, etc. and on the contrary would invest in a company that can be a disrupter in a space that will absolutely save limbs, organs, and lives and have enjoyed great success in doing so" NOT INVESTING are key words. They do not invest, therefore they have NO WORRY. Not sure what this is referencing as it makes no sense regarding my statement about the institutions investing with a moral compassWhatever you, me, or anyone feels about Afrezza does not matter from an investment standpoint. The drama of "saving lives limbs and organs is just that....drama. If someone want to "help", then perhaps they should consider selling their shares, and simply taking that money and cutting a check to MannKind so they can spend that money spreading the word. Somehow I highly doubt these "moral investors" would do that. "Again drama to you but quality of life for others and you can believe that there is a contingent of investors that are users and believers in the product, and they are buying the shares that are sold from the company into the market, so indirectly they are "cutting their checks" to MNKD" and some of them are their own worst enemy on the investment., yours and your lemmings opinion's They are simply to blind to realize it. No they are trying to keep from going blind They are not cutting checks to MannKind. Not directly but indirectly they certainly are Think about that. 200 million shares a year trade. Do you really believe these are all funding MannKind. Absolutely not, most of those are pitch and catch between trading desks, c'mon Spence you should know that You need a serious market lesson. You need a moral compass lesson and thanks but I am quite happy with my market experience(s)
"What it means to the equity is directly a result of what it means to the providers, insurers, PBM's and obviously one very prominent KOL is presenting with that in mind, you can think he joined the company for sh*ts and giggles and some type of masquerade only to make a "not so meaningful difference with his presentation" but most logical unbiased minds would have to question your line of "thinking"" Tell me....what are your projections? Have the courage to put them down, AND put down what they would be without STAT, etc. Are you courageous enough to put numbers on the table? I HIGHLY DOUBT IT. What will you say when your numbers are not being met. I bet you will offer any number of excuses. I don't make excuses, no need to, but if you go back a couple of years or so I was one of the first to state that until the insurance issue got taken care of scripts would never get off the ground...I didn't need to write two years of articles to foresee that as I was one of the first denied frustrated patients who was in touch with the then rep that was as equally frustrated, they left SNY and are now with DEXCOM btw. So let me patronize you and appease your egocentric modeling for the purposes of entertaining you:
I will make it easy. Fill In The Blanks Q2 net revenue with your thesis on STAT _ Q2 will most likely not feel any direct effect as the quarter will be basically over by then so given we are just about halfway through it _ 4.2M____ Q2 net revenue without your thesis __ 4.2M______ Q3 with __ 6.2M______ Q3 without __ 4.5M_____ Q4 with ____ 8.5M_____ Q4 without ___ 5.5M______ Now the bigger question to you: Where do you think the SI will be by the end of Q4, and what do you think the sp will be if your projection is correct or if mine is? I do believe that the company will meet the lower end of its guidance between net rev and other rev., I know you do not forecast that in your models.
10 May 2018, 07:09 PM Report Abuse Reply0Like
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on May 10, 2018 20:54:23 GMT -5
Spencer is strictly a numbers guy. He does NOT understand the science but at times he claims he does. That in my opinion greatly diminishes the accuracy (so far) of his forecasts as he shows ignorance and bias. After a year of launch 3.0, refills still remain less then new RX, where they should be 2-3x times the number. People are trying Afrezza and not refilling. Using 1 rx and 3 refills as a baseline and a consistent level of 200 -277 new rx per week, why are we not seeing 500+ refills? Even over the last 3 months, refills are static. SO does not need an advanced science degree to show that Afrezza is not growing at a fast enough pace.
|
|
|
Post by sellhighdrinklow on May 10, 2018 21:32:55 GMT -5
That is an interesting suggestion and goes to a wider problem. First, stacking is not an issue provided you do it properly. Stacking is a problem if you just blindly bolus without accounting for insulin onboard, and that is the case with any insulin. Second you are told to check and correct after two hours which means stacking RAA. The reason people don't do that is not because they are scared of stacking insulin, it's because they cannot be bothered to disrupt whatever they are doing to test and correct. Meters even have alarms built into them to remind you to test (nobody enables the alarms...) Right now you are seeing CGM shots from people who are using Afrezza properly. What happens when you start getting broader uptake and the patients cannot be bothered to disrupt whatever they are doing to take the follow up dose? Is the fact that they don't get the results you expect their fault or Afrezza? If it is their fault then why isn't it their fault when they do that with RAA? Mr Hippie - w the cgm, your comment is irrelevant. Folks that are focused are focused. As a 3 year Afrezxa user, I can feel when I'm trending high ( ex...using a 4 unit while eating appetizers and starting w a BS of 110). I feel off when I'm 20 minutes into the start of dinner, 45 minutes later, and realize the dinner carbs are kicking in and forgot I should have inhaled the 8 unit a bit sooner. All good. Easy. The beauty of Afrezxa.
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on May 10, 2018 21:49:20 GMT -5
Wow I am brain-dead, but I can see the Longs are just not gonna take it anymore.....bravo!
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 10, 2018 21:59:53 GMT -5
joeypotsandpans... I'm sometimes unclear what you are writing vs others when things are interspersed, but I'm assuming you are the red text now, correct? It seems like you're projecting that Afrezza sales will be below the lower end of revenue guidance, but possibly pushed over the top by other revenue. It seems you and SO are still within the same ballpark. I certainly wouldn't have the confidence in predicting anything regarding MNKD to want to defend either one of your positions... but I guess from the war of words you both feel you have very accurate predictions worth fighting over. I'll give the benefit of the doubt to management reiterating the lower end of the revenue range given they have far more visibility than I... or you or SO. I wonder if the $2M for India deal gets counted as revenue or will be treated as the SNY upfront was and not recognized when received.
|
|
|
Post by digger on May 10, 2018 22:13:25 GMT -5
The latest this am. deadaim Comments (1881) |+ Follow |Send Message | Mike Castagna.. "...we had an ADA late-breaking poster accepted around hypoglycemia and really demonstrating the differences of Afrezza versus other meal time insulin options. We believe the complete dataset when you look at the hypoglycemia plus STAT plus the history of the safety and efficacy of this product across the 65 trials, we start to educate the physicians on all the data we have, and they're very responsive." Great Innovation and science always wins!
10 May 2018, 09:12 AM Report Abuse Reply1Like Spencer Osborne, Contributor Comments (14436) |+ Follow |Send Message | Author’s reply » Deadaim.... The weight that people are placing on the STAT trial is misguided in my opinion. It is a very small and simple trial that has very predictable results.... simply by looking at the design.
If you adjust after your meal, you will be in range more often. It is really that simple. Investors keying in on this is reminiscent of investors keying in on the label change. Umm, DUH!! The fact that THIS INSULIN allows you to adjust after your meal to maintain better control and time in range with much reduced incident of hypo IS THE DIFFERENCE and the point of the STAT study. If they did that with the current Raa's they may have killed some folks along the way. Maybe that is what is needed to drill it into some people's gray matter, as the thread is titled "you can't fix stupid" ....let's compare Kendall or Osborne, nevermind I wouldn't even disrespect Kendall in that manner. Go ahead pigeon's fly this one over to your ignorant friend, maybe he wants to risk doing a controlled study stacking Raa's vs. Afrezza post dosing, better have some paramedics around, and again if you're going to quote me please quote the entire post, not selected segments. Thank you -J I think Spencer's point is that no one will be surprised by the results. It's just obvious that checking blood sugar at 1 and 2 hours after a meal and dosing accordingly will provide a better time in range, etc. This has already been proven multiple times using conventional RAAs and so you can expect the response from endos to be, "so what?"
|
|
|
Post by digger on May 10, 2018 22:17:06 GMT -5
Just because Spencer does not preach to the MNKD choir, I will take his track records over dead aim on MNKD. I'd say Spencer was spot on about the label looking back over the last 10 months. This isn't about contests between individual's and their "track records", this is about real life reality regarding people's lives. This isn't about day trader's and investments, this is about saving people's limbs, kidney's, eyes, hearts, and having a better way of life with one's family, etc. Having said that there is a 30 million share debt out there that still has to be paid, you can believe it will happen through dilution as he keeps professing, the fact is it hasn't happened yet and could have happened at close to minimal cost for almost a 100% gain. Regarding Matt's statement about the COGS, again what price is one willing to pay to extend their lives, limbs, and organs when there is a viable option that is proven to be superior, maybe not via current "labels" saddled by corrupt former administrators but by the eye test "label" when reading CGM's, etc. Sure there are those that are not fortunate enough to pay out of pocket or have coverage at this time but as the message gets out via studies like the STAT study it could help change some of the dynamics for those people as well. That is why the ignorant statement from him about the lack of effect of the STAT study is so absurd and quite frankly stupid. The "MNKD choir" are not just made up of traders and investors, it is also made up of users that take offense to those that continue to pound on a company and it's executives that are out there fighting everyday to help people. Take off your monetary glasses, it's not always about the money Dennis, Matt, Spencer, etc etc, take if from someone that is afflicted by the disease and has experienced the difference in a relatively very short period of time. The problem is that there is no proof -- at least none that insurers will accept -- that afrezza is superior in any respect that insurers care about. And in a way the STAT study could even endanger insurer approval. Right now, insurers view afrezza as just another RAA and base tier placement decisions on its price and the fact it is deemed non-inferior. The STAT study will likely show improved time in range but will demonstrate that achieving such requires a CGM and three doses of afrezza to achieve. In other words, it makes it look like any afrezza superiority requires a much higher expense than conventional RAAs. That goes contrary to what the insurers want -- less cost.
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 10, 2018 22:17:28 GMT -5
Wow, so much name calling in this thread that it's probably beyond salvation, so I'm just going to lock it.
And if everyone could please cool it on the personal attacks, that would be good.
|
|