|
Post by bioexec25 on Jan 5, 2016 21:15:40 GMT -5
I'm definitely going to brush off my contact list. This really smells. It seems the more data showed intrusion of mnkd on basil insulin or on holistic diabetes the more they tried to kill Afrezza.
|
|
|
Post by oldfishtowner on Jan 5, 2016 21:21:18 GMT -5
Sanofi may have had years, but that would have been years of examining results under strict trial protocols. Real world results are often unexpected, as liane stated above and as Afrezza's early adopters discovered.
I'm not discounting the argument put forth by cjc04 however. I just think the decision was made long ago. Contractually, Sanofi couldn't end the agreement until January 1, 2016. I also don't believe their statement today that the cost of bring Afrezza to market is too high. I happen to think that Sanofi decided to break with MannKind after its changing of the guard at the CEO position. Nothing more.
I also think that they will, one day, regret letting Afrezza get away and that Brandicourt will not sit on his throne for very long. Sanofi's diabetes franchise is crumbling. While the news today stings, hopefully it will end up being the best thing ever to happen to Mannkind because Afrezza has safely left the crumbling Sanofi empire unharmed. And if there is any justice, SNY will keep Afrezza in its Praluent diabetes trial only to see Afrezza reduce triglycerides and cholesterol levels to where Praluent shows no effectiveness in the active arm compared with placebo. I never could see why SNY decided to use Afrezza in this trial, except that they may not have fully understood what Afrezza does.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2016 21:23:07 GMT -5
Sanofi's diabetes franchise is crumbling. While the news today stings, hopefully it will end up being the best thing ever to happen to Mannkind because Afrezza has safely left the crumbling Sanofi empire unharmed. And if there is any justice, SNY will keep Afrezza in its Praluent diabetes trial only to see Afrezza reduce triglycerides and cholesterol levels to where Praluent shows no effectiveness in the active arm compared with placebo. I never could see why SNY decided to use Afrezza in this trial, except that they may not have fully understood what Afrezza does. Now they can pay 100% of it to Mannkind.
|
|
|
Post by kball on Jan 5, 2016 22:13:30 GMT -5
I'm definitely going to brush off my contact list. This really smells. It seems the more data showed intrusion of mnkd on basil insulin or on holistic diabetes the more they tried to kill Afrezza. If this is true, mannkinds path forward would likely be to play nice for a few months while winding down partnership, find another TS partner or Afrezza partner or even outright sale of Afrezza to Sanofi competitor. Then after all the dust has settled at the last possible moment (like Genzyme did) serve up a lawsuit. I wonder if Sanofi will run a few commercials in Q1 as either a show of good faith or as a negotiated way to avoid that lawsuit.
|
|
|
Post by doodyfree on Jan 5, 2016 22:18:42 GMT -5
Sanofi's diabetes franchise is crumbling. While the news today stings, hopefully it will end up being the best thing ever to happen to Mannkind because Afrezza has safely left the crumbling Sanofi empire unharmed. And if there is any justice, SNY will keep Afrezza in its Praluent diabetes trial only to see Afrezza reduce triglycerides and cholesterol levels to where Praluent shows no effectiveness in the active arm compared with placebo. I never could see why SNY decided to use Afrezza in this trial, except that they may not have fully understood what Afrezza does. SNY needs to pay full price for Afrezza now that the agreement is over.
|
|
|
Post by guidepost on Jan 6, 2016 0:00:37 GMT -5
On Jan 20, 2011 it dropped 32.3 on receiving CRL from FDA. Today's drop was 48.4, seems a bit overdone to me.
|
|
|
Post by comny on Jan 6, 2016 0:04:23 GMT -5
I remember in the agreement, there is a 5% stake threshold, if SNY cancels the agreement, when can they start to acquire more than 5%? Now or in 6 months?
|
|
|
Post by hawaiiguy42 on Jan 6, 2016 0:13:37 GMT -5
Sanofi may have had years, but that would have been years of examining results under strict trial protocols. Real world results are often unexpected, as liane stated above and as Afrezza's early adopters discovered.
I'm not discounting the argument put forth by cjc04 however. I just think the decision was made long ago. Contractually, Sanofi couldn't end the agreement until January 1, 2016. I also don't believe their statement today that the cost of bring Afrezza to market is too high. I happen to think that Sanofi decided to break with MannKind after its changing of the guard at the CEO position. Nothing more.
I also think that they will, one day, regret letting Afrezza get away and that Brandicourt will not sit on his throne for very long. Brandicourt - will be famous for/with both of his debacles That's exactly what I think! Also, I was looking for a paper that I have written about Sanofi purposely suppressing Afrezza after replacing their CEO (Sanofi) but I cannot find it... I will have to look on one of my backup drives. As I recall it basically stated that Sanofi was intentionally putting their foot on top of Afrezza for fear of taking/diminishing their insulin and other Big Pharma's insulins which would impact their market shares.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jan 6, 2016 1:42:21 GMT -5
I remember in the agreement, there is a 5% stake threshold, if SNY cancels the agreement, when can they start to acquire more than 5%? Now or in 6 months? There is an SEC requirement that they can only deliver the share purchase agreement via unicorn messenger, and there is a bit of a backlog for unicorns right now. Shockingly, it might be more than 6 months.
|
|