|
|
Post by lakers on Nov 6, 2015 11:35:35 GMT -5
The Flop was shown as corroborated by 11/4-5 Vegas training and Sny Meet Mgmt pdf. Rob, you missed that Afrezza was mentioned 3 times on pg 63, 105, 210. Please re-read. Slide 210 is interesting, left as an exercise to readers. It shows how much they love Afrezza.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 6, 2015 11:37:00 GMT -5
Rob, thanks for your digging and diligence. I still think they want Afrezza but don't really understand how to market it. They are old and backwards in their approach. I think they are highly constrained in how they can market it. Understanding how best to market it under tight FDA constraints is likely not easy. It is chicken and egg problem with doctors likely reluctant to bother with learning how to prescribe while 3/4 of patients really don't have access from payers, and payers resistant to adding a brand new very expensive therapy unless there is significant insistence from the medical community. Unfortunately the FDA trials left SNY with an uphill battle. Fortunately, they are saying they are committed to fighting that battle. |
|
|
|
Post by mnkdorbust on Nov 6, 2015 11:57:49 GMT -5
The Flop was shown as corroborated by 11/4-5 Vegas training and Sny Meet Mgmt pdf. Rob, you missed that Afrezza was mentioned 3 times on pg 63, 105, 210. Please re-read. Slide 210 is interesting, left as an exercise to readers. It shows how much they love Afrezza. and slide 24. |
|
|
|
Post by vestful on Nov 6, 2015 12:13:18 GMT -5
Rob, thanks for your digging and diligence. I still think they want Afrezza but don't really understand how to market it. They are old and backwards in their approach. I think they are highly constrained in how they can market it. Understanding how best to market it under tight FDA constraints is likely not easy. It is chicken and egg problem with doctors likely reluctant to bother with learning how to prescribe while 3/4 of patients really don't have access from payers, and payers resistant to adding a brand new very expensive therapy unless there is significant insistence from the medical community. Unfortunately the FDA trials left SNY with an uphill battle. Fortunately, they are saying they are committed to fighting that battle. Chicken and Egg reference makes definite sense. I was originally in the "wait for label/insurance" before marketing camp but now my thoughts have shifted to more(not heavy)marketing. If an increased and balanced marketing approach is taken it should put more pressure on docs and insurance to act more swiftly because of patient demand and awareness. Once that builds and label, awareness, and insurance improves then release all marketing resources in full force. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Nov 6, 2015 12:42:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Nov 6, 2015 12:59:03 GMT -5
Rob - Thanks for taking the time to post Sanofi's commitment to Afrezza. This should finally extinguish the short sellers supposition of ending their partnership. Now if MannKind adds some reassurance on Monday we should see a steady rise in share price. Kas, just taking the devils argument, this could also be just the dreaded coaches vote of confidence. SNY has a fiduciary duty to support the partnership until a decision has been made not to. What is to stop a Board of directors meeting tomorrow to have a different vote? I will take positive news over negative, but it still is pushing the rock up the mountain. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Nov 6, 2015 12:59:32 GMT -5
The title of this thread is; Sanofi Reaffirm Commitment To MannKind's Afrezza Insulin
It looks to me what sanofi did was reaffirm it's commitment to monoclonal antibodies.
screencast.com/t/LlD2FMYz
praluent, sarilumab, dupilumab.
afrezza and praluent in a study |
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Nov 6, 2015 13:13:13 GMT -5
FWIW -
My general take thus far is that SNY is not dumping or sandbagging it. But they are not pushing it hard either. Why?
1. paradigm shift takes time and they know it- including insurance tier issues, PFT, etc. And they are not in a rush - "yet". They seem to believe they have other drugs that will keep them competitive in the space.
2. There is overhang - e.g. Broad adoption could very well tap into their basal market (less need for it, especially if pre diabetics stave of TII). And these basals where they own 100% and its an established market that costs less to enter ….. much, much higher ROI. No brainer from business perspective near term.
I've seen many large companies do this. They fill a gap in their portfolio with something innovative, and of definite interest to some customers. Where it cannabilizes some of their other products, they dial back the effort.
So they leave their options open. If it takes off, they've got it and pivot toward the new drug. If it doesn't, its still a value-add to differentiate their portfolio, and keep it out of competitor hands. In the meantime, they continue to make money on the sure bets.
NET - conservative approach. See where it leads, and in the meantime, optimize where it can help existing portfolio and 'do no harm'. And this could still go places, and SNY could still take it there.
But unfortunately, maybe not on every investor's timeline.
What's not clear to me is MNKD management - was the expectation set up front on this? Did things materially change with major change in leadership at SNY? No doubt - IMHO, it would have been the same game if they'd gone with a different partner. They wanted someone strong in diabetes space. Although a BP without a diabetes portfolio may have been more motivated to fully market/pursue FAST, they also would not have had the means. The time differential could have been the same - or likely, much worse (building relationships with endos, etc etc taking much, much more time).
(Kinda depressed but sober) thoughts for the day anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Nov 6, 2015 13:18:22 GMT -5
So after riding this Meet SNY Management roller coaster the past 24 hours, the most effective SNY 'Study" activity for MNKD IMO would be focused execution for the pediatric trials. Results here could demonstrate: - Ease of use (duh)
- A1C superiority
- Reversal (lowered required dosages as study progresses)
possibly supporting first line usage to halt / reverse damage in early diabetes indications
Maybe then a real fire can be lit under the insurance companies butts.
|
|
|
|
Post by robsacher on Nov 7, 2015 22:07:02 GMT -5
That's the way it is with paradigm changing innovation. Even the Wright Brothers never envisioned that people would fly in airplanes. They saw the airplane as a means of delivering the mail. Also, the predominant view at the time among the population was that the airplane was a toy for the wealthy but no person in his right mind would ever want to leave the ground. A few years later, more people preferred to fly in dirigibles than in airplanes and most people thought that dirigibles would be how people flew across the ocean and continents. Rob- Nicely stated. Let me join the chorus of admirers you have on this board. Your efforts are sincerely appreciated. I particularly admire your careful thought to balance and qualification in what you write, your willingness to acknowledge and respect differing views, and your consistently kind and civil responses to your detractors both here and on Seeking Alpha. Regards, Chris C I'm touched, you guys. To all who wrote those nice words I send you all my best wishes. I appreciate your warmth. We are all in this together and we will see this through. MannKind, Afrezza, Technosphere, Al Mann, and the management team are top notch and Sanofi will not let us down.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2015 22:10:23 GMT -5
You stated that perfectly Robert. Let's give this bad girl a few years and Afrezza will rule! Aloha.
|
|
|
|
Post by robsacher on Nov 7, 2015 22:28:46 GMT -5
So after riding this Meet SNY Management roller coaster the past 24 hours, the most effective SNY 'Study" activity for MNKD IMO would be focused execution for the pediatric trials. Results here could demonstrate: - Ease of use (duh)
- A1C superiority
- Reversal (lowered required dosages as study progresses)
possibly supporting first line usage to halt / reverse damage in early diabetes indications
Maybe then a real fire can be lit under the insurance companies butts.
I agree. Positive results in the pediatric study will an important step in the right direction. |
|
|
|
Post by womankind on Nov 8, 2015 2:33:15 GMT -5
First post.
Thank you Mr. Sacher.
|
|
|
|
Post by tchalaa on Nov 12, 2015 5:29:35 GMT -5
pictures of moments speak more than thousand words Attachment DeletedLet's now await, the market to stabilize and with sector PE to get to where we belong |
|
