|
Post by pmikeks on Aug 11, 2014 15:05:49 GMT -5
There have been 60 million shares traded and the stock hasn't moved that much. Is it shorts churning or is it something else? Market really doesn't think its a good partnership analysts saying one company or the other didn't make a great deal?. The PPS moved almost this much when it was labeled oversold and that was worrying about the unknown partnership. I agree we won't get really rewarded until sales come in over estimates a few quarters at least. BUT we are $2 less then when we got FDA approval. Something is going on, I dont know what.
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Aug 11, 2014 15:11:05 GMT -5
The street did not like the deal, shorts not covering, traders playing the stock as usual and the typical sell on the news after the spike. We have seen this time and time again. If you are an investor and are in for the long haul, then I believe you will be fine. The deal removes a lot of risk from Mannkind and pairs them with the best in the business. As long as Sanofi is genuine in making Afrezza the insulin of choice, I think you'll be happy in a 24-48 months. And yes, many of us were hoping for more of a gift than what happened today but that's the market. The story of Afrezza is just getting stronger despite the manipulation of the market.
|
|
|
Post by seanismorris on Aug 11, 2014 15:18:57 GMT -5
MNKD has always been sell the news kind of stock, then wait for the new 52week highs.
Right now, people are mistakenly listening to TheStreet who is consistently wrong.
Wait for the analysts to chime in, to get a better perspective.
Until now, the analysts assistants have been on Mannkinds calls...the real analysts showed up today and they were overwhelmingly positive on the deal.
Bottom line, Mannkind could have made a better deal (more cash upfront) but instead picked up the best partner possible and pretty much guarantied Afrezza will be a success.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Aug 11, 2014 15:43:05 GMT -5
Agree with mnkdmillionaire totally. Would add that I do think we saw some short covering from about 1:30 to about 3:30, which does make sense. I figure a lot of traders shorted at the start of trading today, those types usually cover the same day. Heck of a nice day for them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2014 15:47:23 GMT -5
"As long as Sanofi is genuine in making Afrezza the insulin of choice, I think you'll be happy in a 24-48 months." That question has flown through my mind too. Anyone think there is any chance Sanofi is not genuine?
|
|
|
Post by savzak on Aug 11, 2014 15:53:30 GMT -5
"As long as Sanofi is genuine in making Afrezza the insulin of choice, I think you'll be happy in a 24-48 months." That question has flown through my mind too. Anyone think there is any chance Sanofi is not genuine? MannKind surely negotiated strong commercialization obligations into the deal in order to protect itself from a lethargic partner. However, the best protection exists in the choice of partner. It's been well established that SNY is one of the best choices in terms of the symbiosis that exists with respect to its existing product line. Afrezza compliments and fits into Sanofi's existing line. Accordingly, it is in Sanofi's interest to sell Afrezza rather than shelve it.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Aug 11, 2014 16:45:42 GMT -5
"As long as Sanofi is genuine in making Afrezza the insulin of choice, I think you'll be happy in a 24-48 months." That question has flown through my mind too. Anyone think there is any chance Sanofi is not genuine? I believe they're 100% genuine, they don't want litigation over the terms of a deal, so I'm sure both sets of attorneys made terms as clear as possible; now, by the same token, I expect Sanofi to defend itself and get everything to which it believes its entitled under the agreements, and I fully expect MNKD will do likewise. Sanofi stands to make a lot of money on this over the years, so they don't want to mess things up.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 11, 2014 17:09:25 GMT -5
At the Q2 conference, Matt also pointed out that, in terms of the financials, this works out to be more of a 50/50 split. Sanofi has a huge advantage in already having a powerful sales force in the diabetes-care market, which will significant cut sales costs that would be incurred by another partner. So they, in effect, can heavily market Afrezza at point of sale, since they've already established these commercial relationships, and have more spend for broader marketing designed to target and capture market share away from competitors.
During the morning partnership conference, I recall Pierre mentioned a fast approaching approval for their new basal that will perform even better than Lantus, the patent for which will expire next year. I thought to myself, "better than Lantus?" Pierre stated that Afrezza will perfectly complement both Lantus and their new basal.
The "non-injectable" aspect of Afrezza was also his answer to the question of what motivated Sanofi to make this deal. There are many positives and reasons to believe that Afrezza will get heavily marketed.
Those of us who have done our DD already have a better grasp of what patient acceptance will be than much of Wall Street.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-C on Aug 11, 2014 17:36:59 GMT -5
Shorting is not investing, it is trading. Most startup biotech's are vulnerable to market games because there is no meaningful market enforcement in the US and securities laws are 80+ years old and sorely outdated. The most difficult part for long investors is the extraordinary timeframe to profitability and having to listen to stupid, poorly informed people spread manipulative garbage that screams that they don't know anything about the company or its market.
To me, the most telling thing is the rare mention of benefit to people who suffer from a condition that creates disability and wrecks lives if it is not well managed. Epidemic and pandemic are not just sensational words reserved for screenplays, they are terms used by epidemiologists to describe the growing prevalence of health conditions that affect millions of people. Forget statistics, what matters is what happens to families and friends that are affected by the condition.
I think Al Mann is driven by the idea of helping people as much as by creating a successful, profitable company that rewards investors. Nice to be able to do both.
GLTAL
Chris-C
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Aug 11, 2014 17:42:09 GMT -5
"As long as Sanofi is genuine in making Afrezza the insulin of choice, I think you'll be happy in a 24-48 months." That question has flown through my mind too. Anyone think there is any chance Sanofi is not genuine? I think the fact they are going to fund all trials, sales, marketing and manufacturing costs, I'd say they are pretty serious on wanting to make Afrezza a blockbuster drug. All Mannkind has to do to make it.
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 11, 2014 18:43:13 GMT -5
I agree with most of what has been said above regarding the Sanofi's intentions being genuine and positive for Afrezza and why they did this deal. I also think that we should not underestimate the value of being able to market Afrezza in combination with Lantus and/or it's replacement. This could allow Sanofi to regain the footing it is starting to lose as a leader in diabetes care, with the talk of the coming expiration of Lantus' patents. With Afrezza and their new Basal Insulin they may now become an even bigger presence in the diabetes market for both T1 and T2. And for T1's it's a 1-2 delivery system that could become the standard of care for many... Because of the looming patent expiration for Lantus, even with a bona fide improved replacement, I think this will be an important part of their marketing strategy and btw, let's assume the new insulin effectively replaces Lantus without too much drop off or even some increase in sales, where does the real growth in diabetes for Sanofi come from? Why Afrezza of course...
|
|
|
Post by ezrasfund on Aug 11, 2014 21:04:51 GMT -5
Another way of looking at the deal...If Sanofi built a plant to manufacture Afrezza in Europe, supplied all the raw material and sold the product, MannKind would still get 35% of the profits. This is really a lot like a licensing agreement with MNKD still being paid at cost to manufacture Afrezza, at least in the US; and MNKD retains the rights to the technosphere technology.
|
|
|
Post by cannon5974 on Aug 11, 2014 21:05:15 GMT -5
I agree with most of what has been said above regarding the Sanofi's intentions being genuine and positive for Afrezza and why they did this deal. I also think that we should not underestimate the value of being able to market Afrezza in combination with Lantus and/or it's replacement. This could allow Sanofi to regain the footing it is starting to lose as a leader in diabetes care, with the talk of the coming expiration of Lantus' patents. With Afrezza and their new Basal Insulin they may now become an even bigger presence in the diabetes market for both T1 and T2. And for T1's it's a 1-2 delivery system that could become the standard of care for many... Because of the looming patent expiration for Lantus, even with a bona fide improved replacement, I think this will be an important part of their marketing strategy and btw, let's assume the new insulin effectively replaces Lantus without too much drop off or even some increase in sales, where does the real growth in diabetes for Sanofi come from? Why Afrezza of course...
|
|
|
Post by cannon5974 on Aug 11, 2014 21:11:33 GMT -5
Sanofi is a 139b company that only put up $150m for Afrezza. It really wouldn't be a big deal if it flopped. I had big expectations for Afrezza, but I must of been wrong about its potential. This deal is so bogus. Mnkd spent $2b and 10 years trying to get it approved. Sanofi got 65% of Afrezza for only $150m. Popped a bottle of champagne after the adcom and after fda approval. Sold 60% of my shares after partnership and probably the remaining tomorrow. Even though I'm up overall; I am so pissed I spent so much time researching this company for past 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by savzak on Aug 11, 2014 21:37:30 GMT -5
Cannon, I don't understand what the market cap of SNY has to do with fair value for the deal. Should SNY pay less if it were only worth $30B? More if it were worth $225B?
Further, SNY will actually spend $925M if all the milestones are met, not $150M.
Finally, you're ignoring the other, non cash value that SNY is conveying...namely, unspecified (to us) millions to promote and sell Afrezza all over the world.
This is the nature of a collaboration or joint venture. We need each other to make the most profitable venture out of Afrezza possible. And SNY is the global leader in diabetis care. If all works out according to management's plan, I suspect you'll find yourself very satisfied with this deal in several months.
|
|