|
Post by scottiemac on Jun 10, 2015 12:24:31 GMT -5
Depends on the insurer but this is the norm in many places. Oh for universal single payer (says one who used to work as a billing clerk, oy!)
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Jun 10, 2015 12:45:12 GMT -5
Matt: Initially DTC will be print and web based. Money is budgeted to produce TV spot but the expense is in airing, not producing. TV is being considered and money is allocated for production. This actually makes sense to me at this stage as imho we still have a long ways to go with getting the majority of doctors on board. Especially if the following story I am about to relate is any indication of the mainstream thinking among doctors to varying degrees... (as I suspect it may be). A friend of mine whose father is a doctor/surgeon (and a large shareholder along with his son, my friend) went to a Sanofi Afrezza seminar given by another doctor versed in Afrezza. My friend's father, the surgeon sat next to another doctor friend whose practice specializes in diabetics, who I will call "diabetic doc." Diabetic doc told my friend's father that his patients were fairly well controlled for the most part and very rarely suffered any severe lows. As a result he did not see much of a need for Afrezza, although maybe for a few T1's but certainly not for any of his T2 patients. Very strange attitude coming from a doctor whose primary practice is focused on treating diabetics. But I suspect he is not alone in his thinking to varying degrees in the medical community. Therefore, I really think the TV ad campaign should not come right away either, until the consensus of thought in the medical community shifts to a less skeptical sensibility. The fact that they are committing to production is still important as the average Network TV Ad spot can cost anywhere from 500k to 1m to produce when done by a large ad agency with layers of overhead. So once produced it will likely air at some point short of a extraordinary event. Also the longer they wait to air the less restrictions there may be as to what they can say. All of the above is just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by eddiemoy on Jun 10, 2015 13:01:43 GMT -5
just had a chance to listen to the part about "sanofi opting out"
this guy jay olsen is a hoot! when he asked when sanofi can opt out... Matt chuckled! LOL! He then went on to say that the document is public and if anyone wants to read it can just google. it. Matt proceeded to provide a broad stroke of the "opt out" terms. Matt also put to rest the rumor someone(goldman shits) been spreading rumors that sanofi can opt out as soon as next month which is FALSE.
earliest sanofi can trigger notice is sometime next year, then it depends on what the reason is, could be a 3-6 month period.
i loved it when Matt chuckled when the prick jay asked the question!
|
|
|
Post by savzak on Jun 10, 2015 13:44:47 GMT -5
Any guesses as to whether GS comes out with a new position statement on MNKD and if so, what it will be?
|
|
|
Post by newmnkdinvestor on Jun 10, 2015 13:50:50 GMT -5
just had a chance to listen to the part about "sanofi opting out" this guy jay olsen is a hoot! when he asked when sanofi can opt out... Matt chuckled! LOL! He then went on to say that the document is public and if anyone wants to read it can just google. it. Matt proceeded to provide a broad stroke of the "opt out" terms. Matt also put to rest the rumor someone(goldman shits) been spreading rumors that sanofi can opt out as soon as next month which is FALSE. earliest sanofi can trigger notice is sometime next year, then it depends on what the reason is, could be a 3-6 month period. i loved it when Matt chuckled when the prick jay asked the question! With questions like this and the down grades why did they agree to do this presentation to begin with?
|
|
|
Post by newmnkdinvestor on Jun 10, 2015 13:51:48 GMT -5
Any guesses as to whether GS comes out with a new position statement on MNKD and if so, what it will be? I see them reiterating a sell based on what I heard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2015 13:51:58 GMT -5
Matt: Initially DTC will be print and web based. Money is budgeted to produce TV spot but the expense is in airing, not producing. TV is being considered and money is allocated for production. This actually makes sense to me at this stage as imho we still have a long ways to go with getting the majority of doctors on board. Especially if the following story I am about to relate is any indication of the mainstream thinking among doctors to varying degrees... (as I suspect it may be). A friend of mine whose father is a doctor/surgeon (and a large shareholder along with his son, my friend) went to a Sanofi Afrezza seminar given by another doctor versed in Afrezza. My friend's father, the surgeon sat next to another doctor friend whose practice specializes in diabetics, who I will call "diabetic doc." Diabetic doc told my friend's father that his patients were fairly well controlled for the most part and very rarely suffered any severe lows. As a result he did not see much of a need for Afrezza, although maybe for a few T1's but certainly not for any of his T2 patients. Very strange attitude coming from a doctor whose primary practice is focused on treating diabetics. But I suspect he is not alone in his thinking to varying degrees in the medical community. Therefore, I really think the TV ad campaign should not come right away either, until the consensus of thought in the medical community shifts to a less skeptical sensibility. The fact that they are committing to production is still important as the average Network TV Ad spot can cost anywhere from 500k to 1m to produce when done by a large ad agency with layers of overhead. So once produced it will likely air at some point short of a extraordinary event. Also the longer they wait to air the less restrictions there may be as to what they can say. All of the above is just my opinion. Great information about physician psychology and ego. Diabetic doc talking some smack. "rarely suffered from severe lows" So tell me doc, how do you define severe and how do you track it, patients "telling you", CGM because it won't show up in an A1c. Wait until enough patients start having A1c in the high 5s & low 6s, Diabetic doc's patients will start asking him why he is satisfied with A1c at 7.4 By end of Q1 '16 there will be a lot more folks singing the praises of Afrezza and boasting about their A1c #s.
|
|
|
Post by pmikeks on Jun 10, 2015 14:19:52 GMT -5
With questions like this and the down grades why did they agree to do this presentation to begin with? [/quote][/quote]
Very good question. Guess we are back to share price taking a hit when Management does a presentation. It was kind of like analysts were playing with them. No respect
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Jun 10, 2015 14:23:02 GMT -5
By end of Q1 '16 there will be a lot more folks singing the praises of Afrezza and boasting about their A1c #s. That is certainly what we all are hoping to see. I for one can't wait to see what impact the ADA conference in Boston ends up having in weekly Rx.
|
|
|
Post by orlon on Jun 10, 2015 17:46:15 GMT -5
Interviewed by the same analyst that issued the sell recommendation a month or two ago. I' m sure this will sell well.
|
|
|
Post by orlon on Jun 10, 2015 17:49:20 GMT -5
Interviewed by Jay Olson, the same analyst who issued the sell recommendation a month or so ago. What can possibly go wrong here?
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Jun 10, 2015 21:00:27 GMT -5
GS is already a shark on the street, but to pay to be interviewed from the same analyst that downgraded them in March makes me question managements competency.
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Jun 10, 2015 21:15:45 GMT -5
GS is already a shark on the street, but to pay to be interviewed from the same analyst that downgraded them in March makes me question managements competency. Right, and if Mannkind would not have attended management would have gotten accused of not wanting to face detractors. At the end of the day they did what needed to be done, go answer question honestly and chuckle at the ridiculousness of a specific one.
|
|
|
Post by papihoyos on Jun 10, 2015 21:17:04 GMT -5
Matt: Initially DTC will be print and web based. Money is budgeted to produce TV spot but the expense is in airing, not producing. TV is being considered and money is allocated for production. This actually makes sense to me at this stage as imho we still have a long ways to go with getting the majority of doctors on board. Especially if the following story I am about to relate is any indication of the mainstream thinking among doctors to varying degrees... (as I suspect it may be). A friend of mine whose father is a doctor/surgeon (and a large shareholder along with his son, my friend) went to a Sanofi Afrezza seminar given by another doctor versed in Afrezza. My friend's father, the surgeon sat next to another doctor friend whose practice specializes in diabetics, who I will call "diabetic doc." Diabetic doc told my friend's father that his patients were fairly well controlled for the most part and very rarely suffered any severe lows. As a result he did not see much of a need for Afrezza, although maybe for a few T1's but certainly not for any of his T2 patients. Very strange attitude coming from a doctor whose primary practice is focused on treating diabetics. But I suspect he is not alone in his thinking to varying degrees in the medical community. Therefore, I really think the TV ad campaign should not come right away either, until the consensus of thought in the medical community shifts to a less skeptical sensibility. The fact that they are committing to production is still important as the average Network TV Ad spot can cost anywhere from 500k to 1m to produce when done by a large ad agency with layers of overhead. So once produced it will likely air at some point short of a extraordinary event. Also the longer they wait to air the less restrictions there may be as to what they can say. All of the above is just my opinion. Why not just post it on Youtube and let Social Media distribute to the masses?
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Jun 10, 2015 21:50:01 GMT -5
Effective reach of media today is based on segmented target audiences and understanding which ones you are trying to reach. Eg; Are you are looking to reach Men 18 to 39, Adults 25 to 54, Women !8 to 34, etc... Due to the fracturing of the media landscape it takes a combination of distribution channels. While television is arguably not as targeted nor as accountable and interactive as digital platforms (eg: you know much more about who is spending time on your digital ad from the info collected (you can respond with personal/customized communication one on one) then you do about who is watching your television ad, the most successful campaigns and cost effective at driving results are a blend of the two along with the right targeting on specific channels (cable and/or local in major markets) /networks and sites to reach the defined target audience(s).
Whatever the decline has been in television audiences to date, it is still far and away the best way to reach the largest audience especially when you combine the total reach of all channels including broadcast and cable. Television creates the mass awareness and digital reinforces that but also drives consumer action as the digital ads can be more specifically targeted to the consumer and with the right campaign allowing for highly effective interactive opportunities to communicate one on one with the consumer and build a lasting relationship...
|
|