|
|
Post by wgreystone on Dec 5, 2019 14:43:41 GMT -5
Losing money in MNKD is not a business issue? Where on earth are you coming from? And I don’t care if he has personal issues with management either. I know I certainly do. Sounds like you work at MNKD I don't work for MNKD. I have zero affiliation with the company. I'm just a long term shareholder who believes in the company and management. I'm talking about Bill's motivation. Bill has made a bad investment decision and is not happy about it. How did you believe the management given such miserable performance. Last I checked, PODD is already an $11B company. MNKD should have been at the same level now with a superior insulin. |
|
|
|
Post by wgreystone on Dec 5, 2019 14:53:15 GMT -5
I agree the pay raises were bad optics but you also have to realize they did not get pay raises for 2 years and no bonuses in the prior year. And this year Mike only received 60% of his target bonus. IMO MNKD was stuck between a rock and a hard place on this issue. You have to be able to retain talent and attract new talent to the company. Mike (& BOD) felt that the pay raises were warranted because they had accomplished a lot in the turnaround. Also remember the BOD determines Mike's compensation and they feel he is doing a good job. Could they have issued more stock options in lieu of money? Probably but you all would have bitched and complained about that. Regarding the stock price.....Yeah it's in the toilet and it's been there a while. But like NATE said the pendulum will eventually swing to the opposite. I am not worried because it will catch up and a proper valuation will be given to MNKD. Wall Street knew the shape MNKD was in. They are the experts and probably collude with each other. The turnaround is complete and Mike is starting to tell the story. Mike has picked up 5 new analyst coverage and more will come. Also I doubt the SP will skyrocket. It will be a slow climb and with each $1 rise the street will take notice and jump in. The shorts will not get burned.....Market makers will not allow it. They shorts have protection. We just have to wait and buy at these levels. That's exactly why I said to find another reason than the pay raises or SP. It's tough enough to do the job Mike's done with the scraps and crumbs left by Matt, who was left with a few grains of arsenic by H. The roots are taking hold and the plant will grow so long as Mike continues to fertilize and add water. Now is not the time nor season to prune. The dead wood is already gone. While I don't blame others for their bad investment decisions, that is all water under the bridge to Mike and not his pony. He's laser focused, IMHO, and you're either on the bus or you're off the bus and THAT is the way it HAS to be! I remember when he was engaging a few posts with others in social media...that sickened me. Showed me he was too wrapped up in the noise and not focused on the mission. Now, we don't here a peep from him or IR and that is assuring to me. It will take time. We will get noticed. The numbers show it...WS can only remain skeptical until even they will have to react. What kind of "water" MC plan to add? $9m TV add or the inhalemyinsulin billboard? Nothing worked so far. |
|
|
|
Post by wgreystone on Dec 5, 2019 15:00:34 GMT -5
Tell me how the current management has failed. If you want to place blame...BLAME AL MANN. He's the one who took the lesser road to getting Afrezza approve. He's the reason why it got a BAD LABEL. It's funny how people love to criticize and talk shit about how someone is not doing a good job but give NO REASONS why they are doing a bad job. State what you would have done differently. My idea quite a long time before it was seemingly partially adopted by this management would have been to reduce marketing expenses by taking a geographically focused approach. Pick a few regions where they had the best traction with doctors willing to help spread the word and the most favorable formulary treatment. Cut expenses otherwise, including right sizing of staff. Mike was slow to do this and never cut expenses as much as he should have. The advertising campaign earlier this year also appears to wasted expenditure. That was not one I advocated against, but I'm still at a loss to reconcile management statements regarding Afrezza being very commercially responsive in the first round of advertising and then seemingly little to no results in the latter. Seems something was wrong in analysis, judgement or candor. Money saved those ways could have sped up some Phase I advancement of pipeline. Though perhaps it wasn't the money situation as much as indecision that was delaying pipeline advancement. And if there truly weren't any pipeline candidates looking promising enough at the time, I think money would have been better spent on doing small trials like STAT sooner than they were done. Either way I think better money allocation would have been possible. I voted against the share authorization because I felt doubling was definitely too much of an ask in the situation they were in. I think it was self fulfilling because it sent a message that a huge amount of dilution was likely, the expectation of which then helped drive down the price and... require more dilution when money needed to be raised. Quite apparent there is a difference in outcomes when something is being done from a position of weakness vs strength. Merely acting like one is in a field of roses doesn't make it so. I've also advocated for more candor from management rather than hand waving and pandering to the latest fairy tale that seems to be gaining traction with retail shareholders. All that said, I'm not one that is necessarily advocating for Mike's removal. I think he has accomplished things and isn't incompetent by any means. He has been in a tough situation. I suspect DeSisto looked at the situation and determined it was unwinnable. Would we even be able to get someone better than Mike. Hard for me to advocate for ousting someone when I haven't a clue who the replacement might possibly be. I met Al once and admired the man and his career. It's why I invested in MNKD. Though I do agree with you, he made crucial missteps with MNKD. I think Al Mann accepted FDA's suggestion to a trial setup of non-inferior, as he believed real-life result would convince patients to switch to Afrezza. The management team failed so far, but Vdex has a chance with their superior result. MNKD and Vdex need to work together to make Afrezza succesful, and Mike C refused to do so. That's the reason MC needs to go. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Dec 5, 2019 15:23:31 GMT -5
Yes!! And that’s the reason Vdex went public, not to gain support for a later entity HfM.
|
|
|
|
Post by theebavarian on Dec 5, 2019 15:28:21 GMT -5
My idea quite a long time before it was seemingly partially adopted by this management would have been to reduce marketing expenses by taking a geographically focused approach. Pick a few regions where they had the best traction with doctors willing to help spread the word and the most favorable formulary treatment. Cut expenses otherwise, including right sizing of staff. Mike was slow to do this and never cut expenses as much as he should have. The advertising campaign earlier this year also appears to wasted expenditure. That was not one I advocated against, but I'm still at a loss to reconcile management statements regarding Afrezza being very commercially responsive in the first round of advertising and then seemingly little to no results in the latter. Seems something was wrong in analysis, judgement or candor. Money saved those ways could have sped up some Phase I advancement of pipeline. Though perhaps it wasn't the money situation as much as indecision that was delaying pipeline advancement. And if there truly weren't any pipeline candidates looking promising enough at the time, I think money would have been better spent on doing small trials like STAT sooner than they were done. Either way I think better money allocation would have been possible. I voted against the share authorization because I felt doubling was definitely too much of an ask in the situation they were in. I think it was self fulfilling because it sent a message that a huge amount of dilution was likely, the expectation of which then helped drive down the price and... require more dilution when money needed to be raised. Quite apparent there is a difference in outcomes when something is being done from a position of weakness vs strength. Merely acting like one is in a field of roses doesn't make it so. I've also advocated for more candor from management rather than hand waving and pandering to the latest fairy tale that seems to be gaining traction with retail shareholders. All that said, I'm not one that is necessarily advocating for Mike's removal. I think he has accomplished things and isn't incompetent by any means. He has been in a tough situation. I suspect DeSisto looked at the situation and determined it was unwinnable. Would we even be able to get someone better than Mike. Hard for me to advocate for ousting someone when I haven't a clue who the replacement might possibly be. I met Al once and admired the man and his career. It's why I invested in MNKD. Though I do agree with you, he made crucial missteps with MNKD. I think Al Mann accepted FDA's suggestion to a trial setup of non-inferior, as he believed real-life result would convince patients to switch to Afrezza. The management team failed so far, but Vdex has a chance with their superior result. MNKD and Vdex need to work together to make Afrezza succesful, and Mike C refused to do so. That's the reason MC needs to go. What does VDEX specifically need from MannKind? What did Mike C specifically refuse to do? |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Dec 5, 2019 15:58:36 GMT -5
My idea quite a long time before it was seemingly partially adopted by this management would have been to reduce marketing expenses by taking a geographically focused approach. Pick a few regions where they had the best traction with doctors willing to help spread the word and the most favorable formulary treatment. Cut expenses otherwise, including right sizing of staff. Mike was slow to do this and never cut expenses as much as he should have. The advertising campaign earlier this year also appears to wasted expenditure. That was not one I advocated against, but I'm still at a loss to reconcile management statements regarding Afrezza being very commercially responsive in the first round of advertising and then seemingly little to no results in the latter. Seems something was wrong in analysis, judgement or candor. Money saved those ways could have sped up some Phase I advancement of pipeline. Though perhaps it wasn't the money situation as much as indecision that was delaying pipeline advancement. And if there truly weren't any pipeline candidates looking promising enough at the time, I think money would have been better spent on doing small trials like STAT sooner than they were done. Either way I think better money allocation would have been possible. I voted against the share authorization because I felt doubling was definitely too much of an ask in the situation they were in. I think it was self fulfilling because it sent a message that a huge amount of dilution was likely, the expectation of which then helped drive down the price and... require more dilution when money needed to be raised. Quite apparent there is a difference in outcomes when something is being done from a position of weakness vs strength. Merely acting like one is in a field of roses doesn't make it so. I've also advocated for more candor from management rather than hand waving and pandering to the latest fairy tale that seems to be gaining traction with retail shareholders. All that said, I'm not one that is necessarily advocating for Mike's removal. I think he has accomplished things and isn't incompetent by any means. He has been in a tough situation. I suspect DeSisto looked at the situation and determined it was unwinnable. Would we even be able to get someone better than Mike. Hard for me to advocate for ousting someone when I haven't a clue who the replacement might possibly be. I met Al once and admired the man and his career. It's why I invested in MNKD. Though I do agree with you, he made crucial missteps with MNKD. I think Al Mann accepted FDA's suggestion to a trial setup of non-inferior, as he believed real-life result would convince patients to switch to Afrezza. The management team failed so far, but Vdex has a chance with their superior result. MNKD and Vdex need to work together to make Afrezza succesful, and Mike C refused to do so. That's the reason MC needs to go. VDex certainly hasn't presented any data sets yet that would be interpreted as demonstrating superiority in the sense that would be needed for FDA to accept that claim. Further, there are plenty of anecdotal reports from non VDex Afrezza users achieving pretty amazing results, but of course anecdotal means little within scientific community. There are many patients on RAA that do far better than the average, so one could always present a few of them that looked "superior". If VDex is truly getting consistently good results it is a shame that they haven't collected data. Probably MNKD management would even look at them differently if they were collecting data in a manner that VDex could present results to the medical community. In my mind VDex released data so far doesn't even reach the level of convincing that was achieved by Sam's initial group of 5 or 6 patients. Sam's data at least had met the standard of identifying the patients ahead of time and then tracking/presenting their results for better or worse. I don't doubt that VDex is doing better than the average doc prescribing Afrezza. Whether they achieve better results than all other clinics, I've seen no evidence of that. Many forms of "working together" between pharma companies and clinics/doctors are illegal under current FDA regulation. So the devil is certainly in the detail as to what to credit or demerit Mike for not doing with VDex. |
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Dec 5, 2019 15:58:51 GMT -5
That's exactly why I said to find another reason than the pay raises or SP. It's tough enough to do the job Mike's done with the scraps and crumbs left by Matt, who was left with a few grains of arsenic by H. The roots are taking hold and the plant will grow so long as Mike continues to fertilize and add water. Now is not the time nor season to prune. The dead wood is already gone. While I don't blame others for their bad investment decisions, that is all water under the bridge to Mike and not his pony. He's laser focused, IMHO, and you're either on the bus or you're off the bus and THAT is the way it HAS to be! I remember when he was engaging a few posts with others in social media...that sickened me. Showed me he was too wrapped up in the noise and not focused on the mission. Now, we don't here a peep from him or IR and that is assuring to me. It will take time. We will get noticed. The numbers show it...WS can only remain skeptical until even they will have to react. What kind of "water" MC plan to add? $9m TV add or the inhalemyinsulin billboard? Nothing worked so far. A totally myopic view. Are scripts rising? Are YoY and QoQ revenues increasing? Geeez...actually tangible and quantifiable. Not some joe-shit-the-rag man selling you his wares down the street telling you it's all gold. |
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Dec 5, 2019 16:06:53 GMT -5
I think Al Mann accepted FDA's suggestion to a trial setup of non-inferior, as he believed real-life result would convince patients to switch to Afrezza. The management team failed so far, but Vdex has a chance with their superior result. MNKD and Vdex need to work together to make Afrezza succesful, and Mike C refused to do so. That's the reason MC needs to go. VDex certainly hasn't presented any data sets yet that would be interpreted as demonstrating superiority in the sense that would be needed for FDA to accept that claim. Further, there are plenty of anecdotal reports from non VDex Afrezza users achieving pretty amazing results, but of course anecdotal means little within scientific community. There are many patients on RAA that do far better than the average, so one could always present a few of them that looked "superior". If VDex is truly getting consistently good results it is a shame that they haven't collected data. Probably MNKD management would even look at them differently if they were collecting data in a manner that VDex could present results to the medical community. In my mind VDex released data so far doesn't even reach the level of convincing that was achieved by Sam's initial group of 5 or 6 patients. Sam's data at least had met the standard of identifying the patients ahead of time and then tracking/presenting their results for better or worse. I don't doubt that VDex is doing better than the average doc prescribing Afrezza. Whether they achieve better results than all other clinics, I've seen no evidence of that. Many forms of "working together" between pharma companies and clinics/doctors are illegal under current FDA regulation. So the devil is certainly in the detail as to what to credit or demerit Mike for not doing with VDex. Hard not to laugh at the posts that claim Vdex is superior without actually having proof of their success? |
|
|
|
Post by wgreystone on Dec 5, 2019 16:09:47 GMT -5
What kind of "water" MC plan to add? $9m TV add or the inhalemyinsulin billboard? Nothing worked so far. A totally myopic view. Are scripts rising? Are YoY and QoQ revenues increasing? Geeez...actually tangible and quantifiable. Not some joe-shit-the-rag man selling you his wares down the street telling you it's all gold. Scripts rose about 13% last week. How could anyone accept that result with 70+ sales force? |
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Dec 5, 2019 16:14:39 GMT -5
A totally myopic view. Are scripts rising? Are YoY and QoQ revenues increasing? Geeez...actually tangible and quantifiable. Not some joe-shit-the-rag man selling you his wares down the street telling you it's all gold. Scripts rose about 13% last week. How could anyone accept that result with 70+ sales force? So, just stay focused right there. You're making my point. |
|
|
|
Post by mango on Dec 5, 2019 16:18:13 GMT -5
Scripts rose about 13% last week. How could anyone accept that result with 70+ sales force? So, just stay focused right there. You're making my point. Without MannKind paying to play like Sanofi, Novo, Lilly, and/or, without ADA updating the SoC to accurately reflect Technosphere Insulin science, what the hell does everyone expect? Should be common sense that scripts will be a very slow rise while dealing with this issues. But, that’s just mango’stakeonit |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Dec 5, 2019 16:29:08 GMT -5
On a positive note this insurance thing is a pain in the ass ( as expressed on Facebook today ) and Vdex does have very good results with their insurance because they use the patients results to get the coverage. That takes time and individual attention to each patient. Most people are completely covered with insurance for each Vdex visit with a small co-pay. And are on Medicare.( I’m speaking now of the New Mexico clinics because there’s so many type 2’s in that area.)
The docs can see the CGM readings so they’re very closely monitoring these people until they get used to how to titrate. Once a week visits, and then later on it goes to once every two months. The patients are extremely grateful to have been introduced to a product that can keep them healthy for the rest of their life and give them a normal lifespan. Patients feel like they get the attention and the time they need, and feel happy that they’re not just thrown out there to figure it out by themselves. So .... they stay on it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2019 16:46:28 GMT -5
That's exactly why I said to find another reason than the pay raises or SP. It's tough enough to do the job Mike's done with the scraps and crumbs left by Matt, who was left with a few grains of arsenic by H. The roots are taking hold and the plant will grow so long as Mike continues to fertilize and add water. Now is not the time nor season to prune. The dead wood is already gone. While I don't blame others for their bad investment decisions, that is all water under the bridge to Mike and not his pony. He's laser focused, IMHO, and you're either on the bus or you're off the bus and THAT is the way it HAS to be! I remember when he was engaging a few posts with others in social media...that sickened me. Showed me he was too wrapped up in the noise and not focused on the mission. Now, we don't here a peep from him or IR and that is assuring to me. It will take time. We will get noticed. The numbers show it...WS can only remain skeptical until even they will have to react. What kind of "water" MC plan to add? $9m TV add or the inhalemyinsulin billboard? Nothing worked so far. Revenues are rising > 40%. I would say it's working. Mike has always warned everyone that it will be a slow UPTAKE. Most Diabetics do not jump at the latest and greatest drugs and we all know doctors do not change therapies if their patient is STABLE. Now I did not say within range....I said STABLE. Most Drs. are fearful of HYPOS and they are happy with a patient between 7.05 - 8.0. As long as they are stable the doc is fine. |
|
|
|
Post by wgreystone on Dec 5, 2019 17:02:02 GMT -5
What kind of "water" MC plan to add? $9m TV add or the inhalemyinsulin billboard? Nothing worked so far. Revenues are rising > 40%. I would say it's working. Mike has always warned everyone that it will be a slow UPTAKE. Most Diabetics do not jump at the latest and greatest drugs and we all know doctors do not change therapies if their patient is STABLE. Now I did not say within range....I said STABLE. Most Drs. are fearful of HYPOS and they are happy with a patient between 7.05 - 8.0. As long as they are stable the doc is fine. Revenue growth 40% largely due to per-script price increase, script count actually only grew in low teens. Totally unacceptable at this small script count base. What is even worse is retention rate, which implies patients only got mixed result. Even MC admitted it in the CC. With the poor label and mixed patient experience, how would you still believe it would take off under the current management team? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2019 17:16:59 GMT -5
Revenues are rising > 40%. I would say it's working. Mike has always warned everyone that it will be a slow UPTAKE. Most Diabetics do not jump at the latest and greatest drugs and we all know doctors do not change therapies if their patient is STABLE. Now I did not say within range....I said STABLE. Most Drs. are fearful of HYPOS and they are happy with a patient between 7.05 - 8.0. As long as they are stable the doc is fine. Revenue growth 40% largely due to per-script price increase, script count actually only grew in low teens. Totally unacceptable at this small script count base. What is even worse is retention rate, which implies patients only got mixed result. Even MC admitted it in the CC. With the poor label and mixed patient experience, how would you still believe it would take off under the current management team? Mike has identified and addressed these issues. Let's see what happens. |
|
