|
|
Post by mnholdem on Dec 16, 2015 17:04:06 GMT -5
Actually, Sanofi can buy the rights to IP (patents) and rights to use the technology for manufacturing Afrezza and GLP-1 only. However, I think MannKind would most likely sell the Afrezza patents and license the TS technology. Sanofi would then pay a percentage of sales for the right to use the Technosphere process in manufacturing their dry formulation(s).
|
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Dec 16, 2015 17:27:26 GMT -5
Actually, Sanofi can buy the rights to IP (patents) and rights to use the technology for manufacturing Afrezza and GLP-1 only. However, I think MannKind would most likely sell the Afrezza patents and license the TS technology. Sanofi would then pay a percentage of sales for the right to use the Technosphere process in manufacturing their dry formulation(s). Some talk elsewhere that the French want the jobs in France, not in the US. They still have unions, and politics involving keeping jobs. Would fit well with your thoughts. I met quite a few Europeans who worked in manufacturing quality insurance involving insulin about a decade ago. They still inspected every vial using real humans to ensure the right clarity, lack of particulates, etc. Incroyable! No way would this still be happening in the US |
|
|
|
Post by brentie on Dec 16, 2015 18:04:40 GMT -5
trenddiver I also believe you are correct, and I have this vague recollection that MNKD was asked this question a long time ago and replied that SNY had no rights to other TS products. This might be a question Matt could answer via email. I'm almost sure he or Al has said that the partnership agreement does not encumber their ability to develop, market, and sell other TS-based products. Yes, I seem to remember that as well, but lacking the ability to point to a particular transcript (without spending time searching), I hadn't bothered saying so. Matthew Pfeffer - CFO In that regard, I've been asked this a couple of times on the phone, so probably clarify it, because people will say what rights in those other areas do Sanofi have? They do have a right of first negotiation if we were to take a formulation of inhalable GLP-1 forward. But they have not rights to those -- any other products beyond that. So, I can't say we would mind talking to them about them when they get to the point when that’s appropriate. But under the current agreement, the only future potential right they have is on the GLP-1. seekingalpha.com/article/2412135-mannkinds-mnkd-ceo-alfred-mann-on-q2-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?find=sanofi&all=false |
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Dec 16, 2015 20:04:41 GMT -5
Yes, I seem to remember that as well, but lacking the ability to point to a particular transcript (without spending time searching), I hadn't bothered saying so. Matthew Pfeffer - CFO In that regard, I've been asked this a couple of times on the phone, so probably clarify it, because people will say what rights in those other areas do Sanofi have? They do have a right of first negotiation if we were to take a formulation of inhalable GLP-1 forward. But they have not rights to those -- any other products beyond that. So, I can't say we would mind talking to them about them when they get to the point when that’s appropriate. But under the current agreement, the only future potential right they have is on the GLP-1. seekingalpha.com/article/2412135-mannkinds-mnkd-ceo-alfred-mann-on-q2-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?find=sanofi&all=falseTechnically Matt is correct since it states that in Section 2.7 paragraph D. (d) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Section 2.7 shall be construed to give Sanofi or any of its Affiliates any rights whatsoever with respect to any proposed sale of all or substantially all of the business or assets of the Licensors, or of a substantial portion of the business or assets of the Licensors that relates to two or more bona fide development programs or products of the Licensors, including […***…] Products, in each case, whether by merger, sale of stock, sale of assets or otherwise. Nevertheless, section 2.7 exists and does provide certain rights to SNY. Perhaps the wording is in response to a GLP product but I doubt it since it talks about multiple products as "each a (***) product in the first paragraph. If the section does actually pertain to a GLP product then by agreement they have no rights to it as evidenced by paragraph D. In section 2.7, I know they are not talking about Afrezza. I doubt they are talking about GLP. I suspect they are talking about Technosphere Products. |
|
|
|
Post by jurystillout on Dec 16, 2015 20:18:33 GMT -5
Hakan presided over the company as the stock fell from roughly $11.50 per share to under $2.00. He also presided over the company as Afrezza failed to gain proper market traction as the company's capital structure disintegrated into a position where they were required to list on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange in order to force Isreli companies to buy their stock to raise capital. He wasn't removed because of some grand conspiracy by SNY and Al for a TS deal. He was removed because he did a horrible job and did damage to the company every time he opened his mouth on a conference call. Perhaps SNY is interested in a TS deal but I don't believe they are as a partner. They can buy out MNKD at any time and have all the rights to Afrezza and any future TS application they want. While that is still an option, I believe it to be a far-fetched one due to the poor sales from Afrezza. The poor sales is a direct result of SNY's lack of effort in my opinion. (Begin rant) I think they see the value in Afrezza and I think they want TS and the drug for themselves. But, why buy-out the company for a premium when you can starve MNKD and Afrezza of the resources and effort needed to make it a success, try and force MNKD into bankruptcy and buy everything in liquidation for pennies on the dollar? Business is cut-throat and I'm not under the any dillusions that SNY has lived up to their "commercially reasonable efforts" or we'd see greater success than we seen thus far. I sincerely hope companies are interested in pulmonary delivery for their drugs. Afrezza has proven that it's more effective than anything available today. It's time for SNY to "piss or get off the pot" as my Pop always liked to say. I think there are other companies out there that wouldn't string MNKD along like we've seen from SNY. (End rant) I agree however they don't need to buy everything in liquidation, they get everything because everything in mnkd is used as collateral on the loan from sny |
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Dec 16, 2015 20:31:42 GMT -5
Hakan presided over the company as the stock fell from roughly $11.50 per share to under $2.00. He also presided over the company as Afrezza failed to gain proper market traction as the company's capital structure disintegrated into a position where they were required to list on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange in order to force Isreli companies to buy their stock to raise capital. He wasn't removed because of some grand conspiracy by SNY and Al for a TS deal. He was removed because he did a horrible job and did damage to the company every time he opened his mouth on a conference call. Perhaps SNY is interested in a TS deal but I don't believe they are as a partner. They can buy out MNKD at any time and have all the rights to Afrezza and any future TS application they want. While that is still an option, I believe it to be a far-fetched one due to the poor sales from Afrezza. The poor sales is a direct result of SNY's lack of effort in my opinion. (Begin rant) I think they see the value in Afrezza and I think they want TS and the drug for themselves. But, why buy-out the company for a premium when you can starve MNKD and Afrezza of the resources and effort needed to make it a success, try and force MNKD into bankruptcy and buy everything in liquidation for pennies on the dollar? Business is cut-throat and I'm not under the any dillusions that SNY has lived up to their "commercially reasonable efforts" or we'd see greater success than we seen thus far. I sincerely hope companies are interested in pulmonary delivery for their drugs. Afrezza has proven that it's more effective than anything available today. It's time for SNY to "piss or get off the pot" as my Pop always liked to say. I think there are other companies out there that wouldn't string MNKD along like we've seen from SNY. (End rant) I agree however they don't need to buy everything in liquidation, they get everything because everything in mnkd is used as collateral on the loan from sny Yeah probably true if it was another US corporation and MNKD but in US courts, I am not sure SNY would be viewed favorably. They (SNY) are on record as saying the US market is very important to them, and that they (SNY) wants to expand their diabetes sales... Fears are probably way overblown, but would this be decided in an international court? That might be very unfavorable for MNKD and us retail shareholders/enthusiasts |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Dec 16, 2015 22:14:42 GMT -5
Hakan presided over the company as the stock fell from roughly $11.50 per share to under $2.00. He also presided over the company as Afrezza failed to gain proper market traction as the company's capital structure disintegrated into a position where they were required to list on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange in order to force Isreli companies to buy their stock to raise capital. He wasn't removed because of some grand conspiracy by SNY and Al for a TS deal. He was removed because he did a horrible job and did damage to the company every time he opened his mouth on a conference call. Perhaps SNY is interested in a TS deal but I don't believe they are as a partner. They can buy out MNKD at any time and have all the rights to Afrezza and any future TS application they want. While that is still an option, I believe it to be a far-fetched one due to the poor sales from Afrezza. The poor sales is a direct result of SNY's lack of effort in my opinion. (Begin rant) I think they see the value in Afrezza and I think they want TS and the drug for themselves. But, why buy-out the company for a premium when you can starve MNKD and Afrezza of the resources and effort needed to make it a success, try and force MNKD into bankruptcy and buy everything in liquidation for pennies on the dollar? Business is cut-throat and I'm not under the any dillusions that SNY has lived up to their "commercially reasonable efforts" or we'd see greater success than we seen thus far. I sincerely hope companies are interested in pulmonary delivery for their drugs. Afrezza has proven that it's more effective than anything available today. It's time for SNY to "piss or get off the pot" as my Pop always liked to say. I think there are other companies out there that wouldn't string MNKD along like we've seen from SNY. (End rant) I agree however they don't need to buy everything in liquidation, they get everything because everything in mnkd is used as collateral on the loan from sny Incorrect. Everything Afrezza-related, including the Danbury production plant, is collateral. Technosphere and all pipeline development is protected. This is why, at one point last year, I suggested that all non-Afrezza assets may be spun off into a separate entity. |
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Dec 16, 2015 22:24:10 GMT -5
I agree however they don't need to buy everything in liquidation, they get everything because everything in mnkd is used as collateral on the loan from sny Incorrect. Everything Afrezza-related, including the Danbury production plant, is collateral. Technosphere and all pipeline development is protected. This is why, at one point last year, I suggested that all non-Afrezza assets may be spun off into a separate entity. Great point mnholdem. There is no way SNY will try to pull a fast one on us, not will all the deals and incest going on-- B-I is tight with LLY, now SNY is doing business with B-I, and SNY apparently (note to liane I'm being good, no bold fonts  ) screwing MNKD -- SNY would look like crap if challenged in the US courts. That said, just how legitimate are all the redacted documents for a public company, mnholdem ? This is business not international intrigue, or am I wrong? Al has brought way too many friends and supporters into this to offer up a sacrificial lamb for reasons unknown, if I am wrong, please let me know asap... but it seems we are bouncing off of a bottom precisely engineered by GSCO et al |
|
|
|
Post by kdaddyfresh2000 on Dec 16, 2015 22:30:44 GMT -5
Incorrect. Everything Afrezza-related, including the Danbury production plant, is collateral. Technosphere and all pipeline development is protected. This is why, at one point last year, I suggested that all non-Afrezza assets may be spun off into a separate entity. Great point mnholdem. There is no way SNY will try to pull a fast one on us, not will all the deals and incest going on-- B-I is tight with LLY, now SNY is doing business with B-I, and SNY apparently (note to liane I'm being good, no bold fonts ) screwing MNKD -- SNY would look like crap if challenged in the US courts. That said, just how legitimate are all the redacted documents for a public company, mnholdem ? This is business not international intrigue, or am I wrong? Al has brought way too many friends and supporters into this to offer up a sacrificial lamb for reasons unknown, if I am wrong, please let me know asap... but it seems we are bouncing off of a bottom precisely engineered by GSCO et al You bring up a good point that's not often discussed. Has Al brought friends/family into Mannkind as investors? If so, that's a big incentive for him to keep pressing, as I'm sure they're as frustrated as we are (or at least I am). |
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Dec 17, 2015 0:56:45 GMT -5
Matthew Pfeffer - CFO In that regard, I've been asked this a couple of times on the phone, so probably clarify it, because people will say what rights in those other areas do Sanofi have? They do have a right of first negotiation if we were to take a formulation of inhalable GLP-1 forward. But they have not rights to those -- any other products beyond that. So, I can't say we would mind talking to them about them when they get to the point when that’s appropriate. But under the current agreement, the only future potential right they have is on the GLP-1. seekingalpha.com/article/2412135-mannkinds-mnkd-ceo-alfred-mann-on-q2-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?find=sanofi&all=falseTechnically Matt is correct since it states that in Section 2.7 paragraph D. (d) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Section 2.7 shall be construed to give Sanofi or any of its Affiliates any rights whatsoever with respect to any proposed sale of all or substantially all of the business or assets of the Licensors, or of a substantial portion of the business or assets of the Licensors that relates to two or more bona fide development programs or products of the Licensors, including […***…] Products, in each case, whether by merger, sale of stock, sale of assets or otherwise. Nevertheless, section 2.7 exists and does provide certain rights to SNY. Perhaps the wording is in response to a GLP product but I doubt it since it talks about multiple products as "each a (***) product in the first paragraph. If the section does actually pertain to a GLP product then by agreement they have no rights to it as evidenced by paragraph D. In section 2.7, I know they are not talking about Afrezza. I doubt they are talking about GLP. I suspect they are talking about Technosphere Products.Hammer - Why do you keep insisting the SNY has rights to all TS products? Are you saying the CFO is incorrect? His statement is clear and unambiguous. Trend |
|
|
|
Post by bloodrootfc on Dec 17, 2015 10:05:07 GMT -5
I am going to frame this quote for a constant reminder of what incompentent management sounds like and run like hell from any stock that conjures memories of Hakan.
|
|
|
|
Post by silentknight on Dec 17, 2015 10:39:27 GMT -5
I agree however they don't need to buy everything in liquidation, they get everything because everything in mnkd is used as collateral on the loan from sny Yeah probably true if it was another US corporation and MNKD but in US courts, I am not sure SNY would be viewed favorably. They (SNY) are on record as saying the US market is very important to them, and that they (SNY) wants to expand their diabetes sales... Fears are probably way overblown, but would this be decided in an international court? That might be very unfavorable for MNKD and us retail shareholders/enthusiasts The venue for any potential legal action would be in the U.S. and I agree with other posters that SNY would likely find themselves at a disadvantage if asked to explain how they've put forth reasonably accepted marketing efforts for Afrezza when one can simply point to their success with their own drug, Praluent, gaining preferred status for it in only four months since approval. I just checked my own plan for 2016, and Afrezza is still listed as a Tier 3 drug, requiring prior authorization and step therapy. It remains unchanged from 2015. Some plans have dropped it all together from my understanding. I just don't see much effort from SNY on improving doctor education or insurance coverage, which makes me question their commitment. Perhaps they are devising studies or gathering data, but they've had 15 months to do that we have little to show for it. Afrezza faces the same hurdles that it faced when it was launched. If patients are having to fight with physicians and insurance companies for Afrezza, then it's obvious to me that the marketing strategy has failed to attack the problems from the angle that in my opinion, would be most effective: getting endos and GP's educated about Afrezza and the patient benefits that derive from its use and improving insurance coverage to make it more accessible. Not to mention the fact that it is overpriced, which also makes insurance companies less likely to cover it. Perhaps they aren't out to intentionally starve MNKD but if there were an organized effort, if I were SNY executives out to get Afrezza for myself, I certainly wouldn't do anything differently than they are now. |
|
) screwing MNKD -- SNY would look like crap if challenged in the US courts.