|
|
Post by papihoyos on Aug 19, 2014 9:43:14 GMT -5
Sales and marketing expense should be a significantly less than if MNKD went it alone. An established sales forced, trained and knowledgeable about diabetes treatments, WOW how good can it get!!! I can't wait until the agreement is available to delve into these details. I'm should there is a reasonable method for allocating costs.
|
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Aug 19, 2014 11:04:19 GMT -5
another point- maybe the sales costs will be apportioned based on how many diabetic products are presented from the portfolio on a typical visit; so if they are hawking 3 meds, 1/3 is charged to the JV...
|
|
|
|
Post by ezrasfund on Aug 19, 2014 11:54:36 GMT -5
But they will need a formula that is a lot simpler than aggregating every sales call and marketing meeting that Sanofi's diabetes sales force makes. Could it be that there are 5 drugs in the diabtes sales portfolio, so 20% of the cost is apportioned to the JV, of which 65% is picked up by Sanofi? BTW are the drugs peddled separately from BGM, digital products, patient support, and drug delivery? [see Slide 7 from the joint CC]
My real point is that for every part of the JV agreement that pertains to MannKind and what they will or will not be reimbursed for there is also the question of what Sanofi will charge to the JV. Those line items are expected to be bigger numbers than the ones from the MannKind side.
|
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Aug 19, 2014 13:53:13 GMT -5
I agree that it would be something like a weighted portion of the sales budget, then the agreement split applied, as you laid out; not capturing each visit cost and working it in that manner.
Marketing efforts may be treated different, as Sanofi can clearly ID those that are associated with Afrezza.
|
|
|
|
Post by papihoyos on Aug 19, 2014 21:38:27 GMT -5
probably a allocated on a relative sales value.
|
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Aug 19, 2014 23:00:48 GMT -5
Would MNKD have been better off with a straight royalty deal vs a percentage of profit deal? I don't know how these BP profit sharing deals work out, but if they are anything like movie deals, the controlling partner shoves all kinds of costs into the deal and minority partner sees very little and has to sue.
I've always felt if you are a minority partner and not in control of the money, you are better off to take a gross royalty. It's a lot cleaner.
Trend
|
|
|
|
Post by gamblerjag on Aug 20, 2014 0:40:01 GMT -5
no one should doubt Al.. until he is proven wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by otherottawaguy on Aug 20, 2014 8:52:13 GMT -5
no one should doubt Al.. until he is proven wrong.
Don't want to throw cold water on the party, one word will be used but naysayers to prove their point: "Ultra"
Hopefully time will tell with an adjusted label. Seems like the concept is starting to stick in the write-ups on the product, just need to make it "Official"
OOG |
|
|
|
Post by obamayoumama on Aug 21, 2014 22:23:21 GMT -5
Would MNKD have been better off with a straight royalty deal vs a percentage of profit deal? I don't know how these BP profit sharing deals work out, but if they are anything like movie deals, the controlling partner shoves all kinds of costs into the deal and minority partner sees very little and has to sue. I've always felt if you are a minority partner and not in control of the money, you are better off to take a gross royalty. It's a lot cleaner. Trend I spoke to Matt yesterday. He clarified the sell at cost issue. They will be able to include all the cost associated with the plant and equipment into the " cost" of the product. He also reminded me that besides the frozen insulin they have quite a bit of insulin from the Orgegon contract that they were previously contracted to buy. That cost of insulin, even thou expensed will be part of the cost. They will not be including any cost to develop the product. Still the plant and equipment is north of a quarter billion dollars, I memory serves me. One thing that stood out was that Sanofi wanted them to secure their insulin contract before they would sign, because even with all the insulin previously purchased, Sanofi wanted to make sure they had enough product. I bought another 3,200 shares today |
|
|
|
Post by otherottawaguy on Aug 22, 2014 8:49:44 GMT -5
Obym:
This probably is worthy of a "New Subject" post.
OOG
|
|
|
|
Post by ezrasfund on Aug 22, 2014 10:27:44 GMT -5
If some one speaks to Matt again I would be very interested in the other side of the equation, that is some further clarification of how Sanofi will account for their costs.
|
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Aug 22, 2014 10:31:54 GMT -5
Obym: This probably is worthy of a "New Subject" post. OOG I agree. This is huge, and could get lost in the posts. Please post in a new thread. |
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Aug 22, 2014 10:43:02 GMT -5
Did Matt clarify anything about the second Organon insulin stockpile. They were under contract to purchase a second amount but I thought they paid a settlement with Merck when they did not think they would utilize the product. One of the terms of the contract was that the Organon insulin supply could only be use to manufacture inhaled insulin, therefore it could not be resold and was of no benefit if MNKD did not gain approval.
|
|
|
|
Post by brentie on Aug 22, 2014 11:04:39 GMT -5
"The increase in R&D expenses for the second quarter of 2011 compared to the same quarter in 2010 was primarily due to a settlement reached with Organon in connection with the termination, by us, of the previous insulin supply agreement. In connection with a settlement, we received the first 2 shipments of recombinant human insulin from Organon and paid the first of 2 $8 million installments in the second quarter of 2011. Additionally, we recorded a loss contingency as of June 30, 2011, of $3.9 million in connection with this second installment that was due, and was in fact paid in the third quarter of 2011. In other words, as of today, we have paid a total of $16 million to Organon and have received a quantity of insulin in return for this payment. $8.4 million of this amount was expensed on account of the insulin that we acquired and $7.6 million was treated as a termination penalty." seekingalpha.com/article/285268-mannkinds-ceo-discusses-q2-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript?find=organon&all=false |
|
|
|
Post by mike0475 on Aug 24, 2014 10:05:54 GMT -5
I'm new here.
http://www.newstimes...eam-5624586.php
.
Just find this interesting that another company picked up a former MNKD employee that was into marketing/packaging
Southport, CT (PRWEB) July 16, 2014
Mënaji Worldwide, LLC is pleased to announce the expansion of their product development team to include the expertise of Lori Snow, a seasoned and diverse cosmetic executive with more than 25 years of experience.
Ms. Snow’s background comprises stints in product marketing, packaging development, purchasing, executive account management and promotions with several brands that include The Estee Lauder Companies, N V Perricone Cosmeceuticals LLC, Fresh, and MannKind Corporation.
2-3 weeks after FDA approval...
|
|
