|
|
Post by tchalaa on Oct 29, 2015 10:23:34 GMT -5
The numbers look right to me or am I looking at it wrong year Sanofi said year to date sales €5 million = $5,483,500 Symphony shows $7,005,800 = %65 = $4,553,770 quarter Sanofi said this quarter sales = €2 million = $2,193,180 Symphony shows $3,236,000 = %65 = $2103,400 Sorry but your assumptions are wrong, the agreement is P/L sharing 65% Sanofi, 35% Mannkind Corp implying manufacturing cost and P/L all in one roughly 25% royalties on from sale landing as profit in Mannkind account. Sanofi has been reporting since the 1Q15 Afrezza sales and for the best of my knowledge that is sales not the profit sharing which is what you are mixing up. The Sanofi CC 3Q15 is over and no mention on this issue but we definitely need to why €1 million less, because base on Symphony data (almost inline with IMS %wise) we have booked €1 million 1Q15, €2 million 2Q15 and should have had €3 million 3Q15, you can verify it. My takeover from the CC is that, Sanofi knows already how the partnership with Mannkind corp will evolve, they know the safety and efficacy on top with the potential of Afrezza. They are simply following a well defined strategy, after thorough analysis and projections as mentioned by the CEO they have a pretty clear view mid-term. Hence, the last strategic question mark will be on november 6, 2015 erased: WHAT IS THE PLAN OF SANOFI WITH MANNKIND CORP? PS: Talking to sanofi IR: I need my million sale back  |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Oct 29, 2015 10:54:01 GMT -5
"Sanofi now projects global diabetes sales over the period of 2015-2018 to decline at an average annualized rate of between 4% and 8% at CER. Approximately half of this revision is linked to insulin glargine and the other half is related to reduced expectations for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM (Blood Glucose Monitoring)."
I can understand the drop in Lantus sales causing a revision to the forecast, but there have been no sales of Afrezza in the past, so how can there be a diabetes sales decline associated with Afrezza?
Is Sanofi saying that "this revision" of their projection of global diabetes sales has been adopted because they originally expected much higher sales of Afrezza from 2015-2018? Combined sales for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM don't even come close to sales of Lantus/Toujeo. How can they link "half" the revision to these three?
Gamesmanship.
It seems that Sanofi executives don't want to put all the blame on Toujeo not being able to capture a large percentage of Lantus patients.
|
|
|
|
Post by rrtzmd on Oct 29, 2015 10:54:45 GMT -5
This is what bothers me. Why is Praluent Sanofi's golden child ? Jérôme Contamine: As you know, Praluent® received U.S. approval in late July and EU approval in late September. The product was launched in the U.S. within days and is gaining market access and developing awareness in the broader medical community. It will become available in some major European countries by year end. Our comprehensive patient and prescriber support hub, called “MyPraluent”, has already served as an effective platform for over 4,000 prescribers. We recently secured branded preferred Tier 2 commercial formulary position with Express Scripts. In addition to gaining greater U.S. market access, near-term expansion opportunities are focused on driving product awareness and adoption. We are also pleased to report that launches in the first European countries are underway. So overall, launch progress is consistent with our expectations of a gradual uptake in the market. Profit margin for one, and I suspect they expect toujeo and praluent to be gain third party payor support more easily than afrezza, based upon the new clinical trials they have initiated with those two drugs. |
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Oct 29, 2015 10:55:20 GMT -5
Teojeo hasn't been approved by many insurance companies either according to the SNY representative in our area AND they have TV commercials very frequently on the major networks. Actually, according to formularylookup.com, Toujeo is on the "Preferred" list of 3936 insurance plans, while Afrezza has that designation on only 96 plans. Broken down as to "lives," Toujeo is on the preferred list for 43 percent, while Afrezza is on that list for only 4 percent. BIG differences. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 11:02:02 GMT -5
"Sanofi now projects global diabetes sales over the period of 2015-2018 to decline at an average annualized rate of between 4% and 8% at CER. Approximately half of this revision is linked to insulin glargine and the other half is related to reduced expectations for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM (Blood Glucose Monitoring)."
I can understand the drop in Lantus sales causing a revision to the forecast, but there have been no sales of Afrezza in the past, so how can there be a diabetes sales decline associated with Afrezza?
Is Sanofi saying that "this revision" of their projection of global diabetes sales has been adopted because they originally expected much higher sales of Afrezza from 2015-2018? Combined sales for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM don't even come close to sales of Lantus/Toujeo. How can they link "half" the revision to these three?
Gamesmanship.
It seems that Sanofi executives don't want to put all the blame on Toujeo not being able to capture a large percentage of Lantus patients.
I agree with your thoughts on Gamesmanship but flat NRx #s for Afrezza concern me. Sanofi has some multi-billion dollar issues to deal with and Afrezza sales doubling each quarter even from a low basis would address a chunk of those multi-billions assuming that sales continue to double quarter over quarter. Maybe Oliver is also saying deterioration of lantus margin and volume will be greater than anticipated and Toujeo uptake will be slower. In that case, why they would not push harder for Afrezza is beyond me. Hopefully we get more color on the 6th. |
|
|
|
Post by mnkdorbust on Oct 29, 2015 11:09:21 GMT -5
Afrezza sales has nothing to do with their declining sales as mnholdem said it's net new so it's not like Afrezza is losing sales. It is climbing (slower than we would like) but it is going in the right direction. I would think with the declining sales in the diabetes market this would be an opportune time to use the Ace in the hole (Afrezza) to regain market share and sales. I understand that the label is less than ideal currently and assume they are working to fix that but the perception in absence of info is they are just sulking in their sorrows of declining sales instead of doing something about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rrtzmd on Oct 29, 2015 11:11:30 GMT -5
Thanks for the links. The first thing that stood out to me was slide 8 showing the graph of the first 25 weeks of toujeo sales with the accompanying note of "additional launches in Q3 in Japan, Canada, U.K, and other EU countries." Then slide 13 claims tier 2 status for praluent and that "launches in first EU countries underway." One would think that it would be more cost efficient to co-launch afrezza with toujeo and praluent or at least try. |
|
|
|
Post by tchalaa on Oct 29, 2015 11:25:15 GMT -5
...
Is Sanofi saying that "this revision" of their projection of global diabetes sales has been adopted because they originally expected much higher sales of Afrezza from 2015-2018? Combined sales for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM don't even come close to sales of Lantus/Toujeo. How can they link "half" the revision to these three?
....
let's remember that the expectation revision wasn't caused merely by Afrezza but instead a 3 products basket (Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM (Blood Glucose Monitoring)). And after having a close look at 2 of them Lyxumia® and BGM (Blood Glucose Monitoring), which were foreseen as potential income sources, they are deceiving after more than a year on the market with prioritization. Afrezza is just at its 3Q15 effectively 9 month (launch February) hasn't yet got into the major promotion stage (TV Ads) just like Toujeo. Nevertheless I personally see the introduction of Afrezza in this list as mitigable, because the full launch is just starting, this is why I think about Afrezza they are not deceived, instead now know what the want. |
|
|
|
Post by rrtzmd on Oct 29, 2015 11:29:20 GMT -5
Afrezza sales has nothing to do with their declining sales as mnholdem said it's net new so it's not like Afrezza is losing sales. It is climbing (slower than we would like) but it is going in the right direction. I would think with the declining sales in the diabetes market this would be an opportune time to use the Ace in the hole (Afrezza) to regain market share and sales. I understand that the label is less than ideal currently and assume they are working to fix that but the perception in absence of info is they are just sulking in their sorrows of declining sales instead of doing something about it. The press release says: "Accounting for recent market trends, Sanofi now projects global diabetes sales over the period of 2015-2018 to decline at an average annualized rate of between 4% and 8% at CER. Approximately half of this revision is linked to insulin glargine and the other half is related to reduced expectations for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM (Blood Glucose Monitoring)." That sounds to me like they are not blaming afrezza for declining sales per se, but are blaming afrezza and the other two for half of the REVISION in sales estimates. In other words, in the original estimates they accorded afrezza turned out significantly higher than actual revenues. |
|
|
|
Post by savzak on Oct 29, 2015 11:36:25 GMT -5
Afrezza sales has nothing to do with their declining sales as mnholdem said it's net new so it's not like Afrezza is losing sales. It is climbing (slower than we would like) but it is going in the right direction. I would think with the declining sales in the diabetes market this would be an opportune time to use the Ace in the hole (Afrezza) to regain market share and sales. I understand that the label is less than ideal currently and assume they are working to fix that but the perception in absence of info is they are just sulking in their sorrows of declining sales instead of doing something about it. The press release says: "Accounting for recent market trends, Sanofi now projects global diabetes sales over the period of 2015-2018 to decline at an average annualized rate of between 4% and 8% at CER. Approximately half of this revision is linked to insulin glargine and the other half is related to reduced expectations for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM (Blood Glucose Monitoring)." That sounds to me like they are not blaming afrezza for declining sales per se, but are blaming afrezza and the other two for half of the REVISION in sales estimates. In other words, in the original estimates they accorded afrezza turned out significantly higher than actual revenues. The release is talking about outlook through 2018. Their outlook is being walked back because of "recent market trends". Their outlook is now for an average annual decline of 4% to 8%. Half of this revision in their outlook is linked to "reduced expectations for Afrezza..." Accordingly, they are walking back their future expectations which expressly includes their future expectations for Afrezza. They are clearly saying that part of the reduction in their overall outlook is based on a reduction in their outlook for Afrezza. Unfortunately, they provided no quantification. |
|
|
|
Post by mnkdorbust on Oct 29, 2015 11:36:11 GMT -5
Afrezza sales has nothing to do with their declining sales as mnholdem said it's net new so it's not like Afrezza is losing sales. It is climbing (slower than we would like) but it is going in the right direction. I would think with the declining sales in the diabetes market this would be an opportune time to use the Ace in the hole (Afrezza) to regain market share and sales. I understand that the label is less than ideal currently and assume they are working to fix that but the perception in absence of info is they are just sulking in their sorrows of declining sales instead of doing something about it. The press release says: "Accounting for recent market trends, Sanofi now projects global diabetes sales over the period of 2015-2018 to decline at an average annualized rate of between 4% and 8% at CER. Approximately half of this revision is linked to insulin glargine and the other half is related to reduced expectations for Afrezza®, Lyxumia® and BGM (Blood Glucose Monitoring)." That sounds to me like they are not blaming afrezza for declining sales per se, but are blaming afrezza and the other two for half of the REVISION in sales estimates. In other words, in the original estimates they accorded afrezza turned out significantly higher than actual revenues. That makes sense and while i agree the spinsters are going to use Afrezza as the blame for declined sales which we all know is BS. We will hopefully find out more on Nov 6th. |
|
|
|
Post by slugworth008 on Oct 29, 2015 11:38:45 GMT -5
Actually the best thing that came out of the SNY CC - Was making it clear that the 20K I had sitting on the sidelines just went into KERX.
SNY could have easily provided very different verbiage regarding Afrezza - Pathetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by mbseeking on Oct 29, 2015 11:43:33 GMT -5
Wont the verbiage in MNKDs CC (whenever that is) now be interesting..
|
|
|
|
Post by rch51 on Oct 29, 2015 11:51:08 GMT -5
Nope not much but at least they told their shareholders where affezza stands at the current point.. And on nov 6 will explain what their going to do about it.. That's how I read it. Lakemann you're a glass-half-full kind of guy- I appreciate that! I've been a steady proponent of MNKD, and as a T2, especially Afrezza, for 6 very long years. I'm heavily invested ($300k) and I've repeatedly sworn to be long and strong. Now today after reading the absurd Sanofi statement, which calls out Afrezza for partial responsibility of anticipated poor Sanofi Diabetes Division performance, I am seriously considering exiting this stock and sucking up my 25% loss while I still have equity available at all. I now believe that Sanofi has very possibly been sandbagging us for a year. I also believe that Sanofi's newly crowned senior regime never wanted or supported Afrezza and did only what they had to to avoid the appearance of contractual malfeasance. I also think that MNKD management has serious fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders for lack of oversight with regard to Sanofi's intentions and launch performance. I mean, MNKD and Sanofi are allegedly at the table together planning the execution of the launch. How can MNKD explain this kind of public statement and the implications it implies? November 6th might confirm my worst fears - God I hope not. If ever there was cause for a non-performance lawsuit, this is it! I seriously hope Management is lining up their legal ducks. If all of my admittedly negative thoughts are even close to being on target, it's gonna get ugly and I don't know if my cast iron stomach can hold up to any more of this BS. I'm seriously bummed! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 11:51:13 GMT -5
Afrezza sales has nothing to do with their declining sales as mnholdem said it's net new so it's not like Afrezza is losing sales. It is climbing (slower than we would like) but it is going in the right direction. I would think with the declining sales in the diabetes market this would be an opportune time to use the Ace in the hole (Afrezza) to regain market share and sales. I understand that the label is less than ideal currently and assume they are working to fix that but the perception in absence of info is they are just sulking in their sorrows of declining sales instead of doing something about it. Sanofi has sales goals for Afrezza for which actual vs plan is lower than anticipated, hence the shortfall as discussed this am by SNY. |
|
