|
|
Post by liane on Nov 4, 2013 17:58:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Nov 4, 2013 18:40:51 GMT -5
~357 Million Shares outstanding as today per Matt.
|
|
|
|
Post by otherottawaguy on Nov 4, 2013 19:44:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Nov 4, 2013 19:51:14 GMT -5
OOG - beat me to the punch by 6 minutes -lol
|
|
|
|
Post by thsloppy on Nov 4, 2013 20:09:29 GMT -5
I was not expecting any kind of announcement or comment on partnerships; but I think we got a key piece of information during the Q&A. If no global partner prior to launch... they will not go it alone and will use Regional partners as a fallback plan vs one global partner. It sounds like there is strong "aggressive" interest from smaller Regional's looking to break into this market. So much so they are putting them off..that's a big statement and not one I think was intended to come out. Means discussions are progressing. If not, given the extensive trial data, Endocrinologist's survey and patient satisfaction data, along with first hand accounts like A-User...this shouldn't be all that hard to sell once approved. I've been in medical sales and management for over 20 years and a great product can be sold just as well by a smaller company than a behemoth (sometimes even better). Smaller companies are not afraid to aggressively push the limits on marketing and compensation where as the bigger ones are always more risk adverse. I have not been blown away by Merck or Sanofi reps, sometimes they hide better in a large organization with these pod structures. Smaller or midsize company reps have more direct accountability for growth. I would think a midsize pharma in various regional strongholds could a good job; but may not have the deep pockets up front and would have to build into it. Either way..I feel pretty happy they will not try this alone as that usually doesn't work out very well.
|
|
|
|
Post by mdcenter61 on Nov 5, 2013 11:15:57 GMT -5
I was not expecting any kind of announcement or comment on partnerships; but I think we got a key piece of information during the Q&A. If no global partner prior to launch... they will not go it alone and will use Regional partners as a fallback plan vs one global partner. It sounds like there is strong "aggressive" interest from smaller Regional's looking to break into this market. So much so they are putting them off..that's a big statement and not one I think was intended to come out. Means discussions are progressing. If not, given the extensive trial data, Endocrinologist's survey and patient satisfaction data, along with first hand accounts like A-User...this shouldn't be all that hard to sell once approved. I've been in medical sales and management for over 20 years and a great product can be sold just as well by a smaller company than a behemoth (sometimes even better). Smaller companies are not afraid to aggressively push the limits on marketing and compensation where as the bigger ones are always more risk adverse. I have not been blown away by Merck or Sanofi reps, sometimes they hide better in a large organization with these pod structures. Smaller or midsize company reps have more direct accountability for growth. I would think a midsize pharma in various regional strongholds could a good job; but may not have the deep pockets up front and would have to build into it. Either way..I feel pretty happy they will not try this alone as that usually doesn't work out very well. Although I would love the immediate impact a global BP partner would have on PPS, I agree with you Thsloppy - would rather have the smaller, hungrier, more mobile companies out there leading the charge if you are looking at this stock 5 years down the road! |
|
|
|
Post by thsloppy on Nov 5, 2013 12:55:09 GMT -5
With all of the regulations around selling tactics and payments to HCP's, the product (Efficacy, Cost/Coverage and Ease of Use) now stands as the main reason for prescribers to write, not how many rounds of golf their Big P rep took them on or how many dinners they were comped on. Relationship selling is nearly dead. Any hungry rep wanting to make good commission can get access to the physician and sell a game changer like Afrezza. Even in Academics...the big grants are going bye bye. And there is so much study data already on Afrezza, it would take years and a lot of patients to discredit it. Big P has a history of buying them if they can't beat them. 1) Big P partnership, 2) Big P buyout then 3) Regional / Country Partners...I'd be ok with any of the 3
|
|
|
|
Post by spiro on Nov 5, 2013 14:21:16 GMT -5
thsloppy,
Nice post, but no golf, LOL. OK, saving your patients lives should be could enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Nov 5, 2013 23:00:10 GMT -5
For those that harbor "political" fears at the FDA level (count me in at least partways), a larger partner might be better; with a smaller one, bidding to become another major, a drug like this could be the catalyst, thereby giving BP more incentive to put the kaibosh on Afrezza. If one of the current BPs got it, the others might lay off as "professional BP courtesy" as they don't want to foster such costly ventures among themselves. But they might unite to fight (by underhanded methods) "BPF" - Big Pharma of the Future.
|
|
|
|
Post by MnkdMainer (MM) on Nov 6, 2013 8:52:23 GMT -5
For those that harbor "political" fears at the FDA level (count me in at least partways), a larger partner might be better; with a smaller one, bidding to become another major, a drug like this could be the catalyst, thereby giving BP more incentive to put the kaibosh on Afrezza. If one of the current BPs got it, the others might lay off as "professional BP courtesy" as they don't want to foster such costly ventures among themselves. But they might unite to fight (by underhanded methods) "BPF" - Big Pharma of the Future. I share this concern, and I am NOT a cynic. |
|
