|
Post by trenddiver on Aug 19, 2015 13:14:25 GMT -5
Suppose that Sanofi actually did pull the plug in the 1st or 2nd quarter of 2016 and left Mannkind with 100% ownership of Afrezza. Although we would probably see a much lower SP for a while, I believe Mannkind might be better off in the long run for the following reasons:
1. Much of the heavy lifting would have been already completed. 2. Sanofi would have paid 2/3 of the start up expenses currently running at around $35 million per quarter. So at the time of the termination, Sanofi would have paid somewhere between $150-200 million of expenses in connection with the launch, additional studies, and world wide approvals. 3. Mannkind would have received at least $200 million in milestone payments which are non refundable to Sanofi 4. Yes, Mannkind would have to develop its own sales force and hire some experienced executives with a drug commercialization background. 5. Mannkind may have to raise additional capital to do this which would mean some dilution.
For me, I would feel much better about Mannkind and its ability to control its own destiny with Afrezza and not be beholden to Sanofi's commercialization launch program or possible conflicts of interest. Further there would be much more accountability to shareholders for the success or failure of Afrezza. But the bottom line is that although the costs of going alone might be steep, the benefit to shareholders of owning 100% of the upside could far outweigh the costs.
Trend
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Aug 19, 2015 13:22:40 GMT -5
Complete folly. Old Mann would sell before doing this.
Becoming SNY is context to this company. MNKD is a development company, and not even really a manufacturing company. I think its just doing it for launching to product. In fact, I would venture to guess down the road once SNY picks up the mfg, MNKD would repurpose its fill lines to run other drugs coming out of the gate.
Why focus on what is context, when devoting their attention and resources to what is core - creating new drugs and technologies in a line of products - will be much more lucrative, much faster?
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 19, 2015 14:01:26 GMT -5
MannKind doesn't have that kind of sales muscle. Not to worry, though. If Sanofi were to leave, another BP would happily step in to take its place. Things aren't always what they seem... our competitors already know Afrezza is going to take a big chuck of their business, which is why we are seeing an unprecedented level of TV advertisement from the other guys.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2015 15:57:29 GMT -5
MannKind doesn't have that kind of sales muscle. Not to worry, though. If Sanofi were to leave, another BP would happily step in to take its place. Things aren't always what they seem... our competitors already know Afrezza is going to take a big chuck of their business, which is why we are seeing an unprecedented level of TV advertisement from the other guys. 8-) Even if MNKD went to an outsourced model using a company like inVentiv to help them hire a team of sales reps, getting high quality experienced sales people with strong managed care contacts would be difficult and MNKD would not have the muscle with the payors like other big pharma players do and even big pharma is getting significant pushback from payors. I agree with you MN, it would push things back and hurt share price in the interim, but a lot of the heavy lifting has been completed and Sam and others are showing Afrezza to work far better than anyone except Al realized. Trying to figure out in my mind what the NRx tipping point is - the point where enough people using Afrezza having great results so that patients and docs readily hear about the success of others on it and ask their doc for it or the docs just readily write for it. Wonder what kind of week over week NRx #s we would see if J&J or GSK got their hands on Afrezza and went full tilt with it and doesn't Teva have a biosimilar Basal? GSK is also putting big money into a Scandinavian facility developing inhaled Rx products. Me thinks that Sanofi has to think twice about walking from the MNKD deal. Not that they couldn't, big companies do not always behave rationally and as we all know, in bigco, the troops will distance themselves from a situation or product that could negatively impact their careers. Lots of uncertainty but these exercises at least help all of us to understand some of the variables.
|
|
|
Post by kc on Aug 19, 2015 16:36:20 GMT -5
MannKind doesn't have that kind of sales muscle. Not to worry, though. If Sanofi were to leave, another BP would happily step in to take its place. Things aren't always what they seem... our competitors already know Afrezza is going to take a big chuck of their business, which is why we are seeing an unprecedented level of TV advertisement from the other guys. I agree with you 100% I stated this earlier today and several weeks ago.
I stated in a posting several weeks ago that the inherit value in the company makes it a bargain for any company that wants to buy MannKind cheaply. The value of just Afrezza should be over 5X or 7X todays price. Forget about the value of any of the other intellectual properties that the company owns. If Afrezza is the real deal we should all be ok in the long run as Sanofi will not let their partner die or go bankrupt. If Afrezza is not the real deal, then we all will have a big loss to carry forward. I personally have invested in Afrezza being a product that will set the bar for the Diabetic marketplace for many years.
Sanofi will not walk away from the potential of Afrezza. If they do others will be there to run with it. There are very smart players in Big Pharma. Who will buy MannKind? Who!
|
|
|
Post by cyn on Aug 19, 2015 18:29:11 GMT -5
IMO, Mannkind needs to remain steadfast as a developing company and not rock the boat with the debt holders by attempting to go it alone. Technosphere will prove to be the "golden goose" ... and Afrezza is just one of many golden eggs to come.
As a long-term "common" stock holder (AKA an investing bottom feeder), the future of a developing company immersed in debt (like Mannkind) predominately lies with keeping the note holders happy. While the "cash cows" are still in the making, partnerships with major league players like Sanofi are the next best thing to keep note holders at the negotiating table and willing to extend agreements. This is good for all stockholders since it reduces the risk of stock dilution, promotes share price, and appeals to institutional investors. Bottom feeders (like stockholders) do not want major partnerships to fail. This of course assumes that partners are acting in good faith to meet contractual obligations. Time will tell if Sanofi is living up to their partnership.
|
|
|
Post by longstocking on Aug 19, 2015 19:03:26 GMT -5
IMO, Mannkind needs to remain steadfast as a developing company and not rock the boat with the debt holders by attempting to go it alone. Technosphere will prove to be the "golden goose" ... and Afrezza is just one of many golden eggs to come.
As a long-term "common" stock holder (AKA an investing bottom feeder), the future of a developing company immersed in debt (like Mannkind) predominately lies with keeping the note holders happy. While the "cash cows" are still in the making, partnerships with major league players like Sanofi are the next best thing to keep note holders at the negotiating table and willing to extend agreements. This is good for all stockholders since it reduces the risk of stock dilution, promotes share price, and appeals to institutional investors. Bottom feeders (like stockholders) do not want major partnerships to fail. This of course assumes that partners are acting in good faith to meet contractual obligations. Time will tell if Sanofi is living up to their partnership. I'm not sure what you mean when you refer to "common" stock holders as bottom feeders. I have done my DD and made an honest investment into a company seeking investors on the open market. I do not consider myself a bottom feeder, rather a patient, long-term investor.
|
|
|
Post by cyn on Aug 19, 2015 19:54:03 GMT -5
Bottom feeder is not meant to be derogatory; but a play on words to remind stockholders (especially "common" stockholders) that they are at the bottom of the "hierarchical" distribution of company assets in the event of bankruptcy ... in other words, at the end of the food chain (i.e. bottom feeders). No disrespect intended.
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 19, 2015 19:55:09 GMT -5
For anyone who cares it is the figure at the bottom of the totem pole that is the most revered...
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 19, 2015 20:32:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kball on Aug 19, 2015 21:34:49 GMT -5
For anyone who cares it is the figure at the bottom of the totem pole that is the most revered... None in my area. Almost extinct.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-C on Aug 19, 2015 23:03:05 GMT -5
Suppose that Sanofi actually did pull the plug in the 1st or 2nd quarter of 2016 and left Mannkind with 100% ownership of Afrezza. Although we would probably see a much lower SP for a while, I believe Mannkind might be better off in the long run for the following reasons:
1. Much of the heavy lifting would have been already completed. 2. Sanofi would have paid 2/3 of the start up expenses currently running at around $35 million per quarter. So at the time of the termination, Sanofi would have paid somewhere between $150-200 million of expenses in connection with the launch, additional studies, and world wide approvals. 3. Mannkind would have received at least $200 million in milestone payments which are non refundable to Sanofi 4. Yes, Mannkind would have to develop its own sales force and hire some experienced executives with a drug commercialization background. 5. Mannkind may have to raise additional capital to do this which would mean some dilution.
For me, I would feel much better about Mannkind and its ability to control its own destiny with Afrezza and not be beholden to Sanofi's commercialization launch program or possible conflicts of interest. Further there would be much more accountability to shareholders for the success or failure of Afrezza. But the bottom line is that although the costs of going alone might be steep, the benefit to shareholders of owning 100% of the upside could far outweigh the costs.
Trend With respect Trend, how is this new thread much different from the general tone you created in the FWIW thread? It sounds to me like your hedgie friend created some doubt in your stated long position. I recommend the two threads be combined and labeled "Short thesis on viablity of the Sanofi-Mannkind partnership. Chris C
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Aug 20, 2015 2:11:06 GMT -5
Suppose that Sanofi actually did pull the plug in the 1st or 2nd quarter of 2016 and left Mannkind with 100% ownership of Afrezza. Although we would probably see a much lower SP for a while, I believe Mannkind might be better off in the long run for the following reasons:
1. Much of the heavy lifting would have been already completed. 2. Sanofi would have paid 2/3 of the start up expenses currently running at around $35 million per quarter. So at the time of the termination, Sanofi would have paid somewhere between $150-200 million of expenses in connection with the launch, additional studies, and world wide approvals. 3. Mannkind would have received at least $200 million in milestone payments which are non refundable to Sanofi 4. Yes, Mannkind would have to develop its own sales force and hire some experienced executives with a drug commercialization background. 5. Mannkind may have to raise additional capital to do this which would mean some dilution.
For me, I would feel much better about Mannkind and its ability to control its own destiny with Afrezza and not be beholden to Sanofi's commercialization launch program or possible conflicts of interest. Further there would be much more accountability to shareholders for the success or failure of Afrezza. But the bottom line is that although the costs of going alone might be steep, the benefit to shareholders of owning 100% of the upside could far outweigh the costs.
Trend With respect Trend, how is this new thread much different from the general tone you created in the FWIW thread? It sounds to me like your hedgie friend created some doubt in your stated long position. I recommend the two threads be combined and labeled "Short thesis on viablity of the Sanofi-Mannkind partnership. Chris C My doubts in my long position have to do with the reality of pitiful script counts I see every Friday, and my recalculation of the market cap of Mannkind based on the pitiful script revenue and the lack of transparency about future Technosphere technology in terms of contributing to the valuation of the Company. I have to admit, I got sucked into all of the hype when we went spent countless days and weeks forecasting what Afrezza sales were going to be after approval, and how that was going to translate into a SP. Now I'm reverting to my prior life, when I was a bean-counter, so I'm looking close at the real numbers which are growing at a miniscule pace weekly. As to this current thread, I'm seeking the boards thoughts about the possibility of life after Sanofi, should that occur. It's clear from my comments that I'm thinking maybe we'd be better off without Sanofi (so far I'm very unimpressed with Sanofi). Of course it would require that Al Mann bring in a whole new management team to lead a new charge. As you can tell I'm not real bullish on the stock but I haven't sold a share, nor have I bought any shares at these low prices. I agree with the other posters who have said that the next few months are critically important to the Company and I hope I am wrong about Sanofi. Trend
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Aug 20, 2015 5:44:26 GMT -5
With respect Trend, how is this new thread much different from the general tone you created in the FWIW thread? It sounds to me like your hedgie friend created some doubt in your stated long position. I recommend the two threads be combined and labeled "Short thesis on viablity of the Sanofi-Mannkind partnership. Chris C My doubts in my long position have to do with the reality of pitiful script counts I see every Friday, and my recalculation of the market cap of Mannkind based on the pitiful script revenue and the lack of transparency about future Technosphere technology in terms of contributing to the valuation of the Company. I have to admit, I got sucked into all of the hype when we went spent countless days and weeks forecasting what Afrezza sales were going to be after approval, and how that was going to translate into a SP. Now I'm reverting to my prior life, when I was a bean-counter, so I'm looking close at the real numbers which are growing at a miniscule pace weekly. As to this current thread, I'm seeking the boards thoughts about the possibility of life after Sanofi, should that occur. It's clear from my comments that I'm thinking maybe we'd be better off without Sanofi (so far I'm very unimpressed with Sanofi). Of course it would require that Al Mann bring in a whole new management team to lead a new charge. As you can tell I'm not real bullish on the stock but I haven't sold a share, nor have I bought any shares at these low prices. I agree with the other posters who have said that the next few months are critically important to the Company and I hope I am wrong about Sanofi. Trend Al has had plenty of opportunities to change management and he hasn't. And we haven't heard much from him lately so who knows how he is doing. Al seems to have confidence in Hakan. Too bad many of us investors don't. I have come to the conclusion that Al has always had weaker yes men around him. Hakan and Matt seem to be nice guys but come off a meek business wise.
|
|
|
Post by bioexec25 on Aug 20, 2015 8:35:14 GMT -5
Short of huge bid for all Mnkd by a fully built-out pharma, I think Sny has the best chance of achieving a global commercial infrastructure. Mnkd trying it alone, as Trump would say would be a disaster given their soft leadership and lack of capital. Even a new BP is risky and has rarely been successful historically.
I harken back to the Tamiflu deal with Roche. Similar royalty terms as Afrezza and complaints for slow ramp but Gilead at the time had no other way to go to market. It was even then looked at as a deal with the devil to get comm ops.going and revenue for their pipeline. It nearly came to a lawsuit as Roche was accused of slow incompetence sales & distribution.. It took years and years before Gilead built their own manufacturing & comm org for Viread and they did it thru acquisitions with the blood money earned from the Roche deal.
As for starting over with another BP, very few cases of that working out. A more aggressive stance by Mnkd even using legal means would likely have a better outcome. I haven't read the contract but given the results there must be leverage. So perhaps there has been some strong words behind closed doors. We don't know but according to Hakan substantial increases in comm spend are happening. Either by original plan or coercion we shall see. But until we get a lot more marketing, geographic rollout, proper tiering it's very hard to tell much. But staying the course with a lot more what I like to call "constructive confrontation" in their joint steering committee is what I recommend.
Meanwhile Mnkd needs to decide if the same path is taken for the next TS therapeutic. If sales for Afrezza don't get moving there will be limited choices in all reality. Btw, i would love to see and comment on the minutes from the joint steering committee. :-))
|
|