|
Post by sccrbrg on Jan 7, 2016 0:27:08 GMT -5
How about "oh.... That's odd.... "paper shuffles" um... well... blah blah blah.
I've been long for a long time. BUT WHO THE HELL DOESNT EVEN REVIEW THEIR NOTES BEFORE SPEAKERS TO SHAREHOLDERS ABOUT LOSING YOUR EQUITY PARTNER!!!!!?!?!?!?!?
What a frigging joke.
|
|
|
Post by thekindaguyiyam on Jan 7, 2016 2:37:24 GMT -5
Wow I'm now more afraid of tomorrow than I was today. Matt did not sound reassuring in the SLIGHTEST. Rehashed the old news of today which everyone already knew. Management running scared without a solution. Surprisingly Duane wasn't even on the conference call either to face the music. UNREAL. If I felt that way I wouldn't be here posting on a message board; I'd move on.
|
|
mannitrust
Newbie
One day we will look back and say: what was all that poking about?
Posts: 9
|
Post by mannitrust on Jan 7, 2016 14:12:35 GMT -5
Agree with that, but that is easier said than done. The cash burn is about to increase substantially because the Sanofi credit line will get cut off and the portion of the losses that have been paid by Sanofi are about to become cash charges to Mannkind. Good news, MNKD can now keep 100% of the revenue. Bad news, MNKD can now pay 100% of the expense and working capital expenditures on their own. We know the drug wasn't profitable before all this happened, and Matt pretty clearly said they are going to cut the price to drive adoption. That is going to eat the cash very quickly and don't forget that some of the cash is restricted to payment back to Deerfield.
Raising money for a company with a 75 cent stock is going to be a neat trick. If Matt manages to pull it off, he will deserve a lot of people's thanks.
I guess from all the chaos everyone heard something different. Matt was clearly not nervous, but pretty direct. He specifically said "nothing will change until the transition is over" same profit sharing and same deal until the transition is complete, which is on or before July. People only hear what they want to hear. In the meantime, they are working on the backup plan. Obviously, they knew Sanofi was lowballing them so I am sure they were already constructing a contingency plan. Also, Matt clearly said "we have been here before and we have prevailed." I agree.
|
|
mannitrust
Newbie
One day we will look back and say: what was all that poking about?
Posts: 9
|
Post by mannitrust on Jan 7, 2016 14:17:33 GMT -5
I never said the partnership was good. In fact all along I felt like we were getting sand bagged. That doesn't change the dire financial situation we are in. It was a catch-22 situation I've been skeptical of the "sandbagging" theory. Now I'm hoping it is true. It seems the theory that they wanted to bankrupt MNKD in order to grab Afrezza for themselves is dead. The question now (if it is even relevant at this point), is the reason they might have gotten into a deal and then sandbagged... to increase the likelihood that a game changing threat would fail in the market? because old SNY CEO believed in Afrezza and new one never did? If SNY was sandbagging then it seems more plausible that MNKD could make some recovery... perhaps find a partner, though that would likely require convincing others that SNY indeed was sandbagging. If SNY wasn't sandbagging that would seem to bode ill for prospects... as it would at a minimum seem to indicate that a business model acceptable to a large pharma is something that has proven difficult to make work. Obviously they were as they wanted to ensure Toujeo was not knocked off before they can release it to the market. They had no issues putting out commercials for Toujeo, which was on significantly during the month of December here in NYC stations. Why couldn't they do the same for Afrezza???
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2016 14:28:26 GMT -5
Jay from GS definitely had info of SNY dropping ..why wouldn't they know as to what is happening for TS deals?
|
|
|
Post by dudley on Jan 7, 2016 14:40:55 GMT -5
I just listened to the call and picked up the opposite reaction to original poster. Matt sounded fine to me and optimistic as always. Had to be a rough day for him. I lean toward the Griffin approach on the SNY departure. Not the greatest news obviously but on the flip side MNKD did get over $200 million in cash (which they do NOT have to repay), impressive production capabilities, and a LOT of exposure for Afrezza. The ball is most definitely rolling with a much higher degree of awareness than it was. Lots and lots of testimonials, lots of overall progress made. The cash situation is what it would have been no matter if SNY stuck or not so that was (is) an issue that existed regardless.
Anybody with even the slightest perceptive abilities has to be able to see the potential of this revolutionary medication. I find it almost - but not quite - amusing that virtually everyone has declared the patient dead and planning the funeral arrangements after only 11 months now on the market. It seems to me that now the real world results are documented in a most impressive way that even MORE entities would be interested in Afrezza than there were after the initial FDA approval. There could be multiple suitors in the wings. A new BP partner would most likely do a superiority trial to get the new label asap and start the marketing campaign with a clear claim to that. The situation could literally change for the massively better overnight, just as quickly as the reverse happened 2 days ago.
I remain optimistic - more convinced now in the efficacy of Afrezza than ever after seeing the truly mind blowing results for patients. Challenges yes, but many possibilities to move things forward. I see the past year as a trial run that revealed both the truly amazing capabilities of Afrezza as well as the challenges. Challenges are just problems to overcome. Getting rid of Sanofi could just as easily be the best possible thing that could have happened and not the widely perceived disaster.
|
|
|
Post by kball on Jan 7, 2016 18:02:39 GMT -5
Bad 1st marriage, better 2nd?
|
|
|
Post by dudley on Jan 7, 2016 18:35:02 GMT -5
Bad 1st marriage, better 2nd? I'm wondering if Sanofi wasn't getting nervous when they saw users beginning to report reducing their basal doses after getting Afrezza dialed in. Why push a 65% profit product if it is going to cannibalize your 100% owned franchise drug? Hopefully lesson learned and MNKD will not partner with anyone having a competing product in the future. They need someone 100% focused on capturing maximum possible prandial insulin market share, TAKING it from the others and not worrying about protecting their other products.
|
|
|
Post by liane on Jan 7, 2016 19:04:55 GMT -5
I'm not sure anyone expected that basal doses could go down until after Afrezza was released in to the wild. Throughout the studies, the expectation was that basal doses could be increased since there was less risk of a hypo. So maybe SNY initially saw the partnership as a way to increase usage and sales of basal. Only after a few months did it become obvious that Afrezza could seriously erode their franchise.
|
|
|
Post by boytroy88 on Jan 7, 2016 20:08:27 GMT -5
I'm not sure anyone expected that basal doses could go down until after Afrezza was released in to the wild. Throughout the studies, the expectation was that basal doses could be increased since there was less risk of a hypo. So maybe SNY initially saw the partnership as a way to increase usage and sales of basal. Only after a few months did it become obvious that Afrezza could seriously erode their franchise. But if that's the case and since they already have rights to it I would think they would revise their strategy and make Afrezza number one on their push list and make it their franchise drug. Why push it away when you have exclusive rights already? There must be more to it.
|
|
|
Post by liane on Jan 7, 2016 20:14:30 GMT -5
boytroy88 - you would think... Nonetheless, they took the "safe" route and went with what they knew - souped up Lantus - vs bold new uncharted territory. Not sure where the pressure came from - whether it was Brandicourt being new in his position or if there was external pressure.
|
|
|
Post by bioexec25 on Jan 7, 2016 20:40:06 GMT -5
boytroy88 - you would think... Nonetheless, they took the "safe" route and went with what they knew - souped up Lantus - vs bold new uncharted territory. Not sure where the pressure came from - whether it was Brandicourt being new in his position or if there was external pressure. Exactly correct Liane in my view. Very difficult for any CEO to turn an entire franchise upside down. So they tried to ring fence Afrezza to usage by early diabetics in an attempt to position it safely into their larger portfolio. A good argument brutally murdered by a gang of facts by real world users. Whilst Sanofi knows the inevitable they are too conservative to drive a stake into the entire diabetes franchise. I do believe they did break some ground to spite themselves and the ground swell will only grow. Competition with better daily basil and emerging weekly will feel quite comfortable with a perfect mealtime companion even if it means lower basil insulin and fewer long term complications. Especially with a global market anxious to rid their life of needles.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jan 7, 2016 22:50:42 GMT -5
I've been skeptical of the "sandbagging" theory. Now I'm hoping it is true. It seems the theory that they wanted to bankrupt MNKD in order to grab Afrezza for themselves is dead. The question now (if it is even relevant at this point), is the reason they might have gotten into a deal and then sandbagged... to increase the likelihood that a game changing threat would fail in the market? because old SNY CEO believed in Afrezza and new one never did? If SNY was sandbagging then it seems more plausible that MNKD could make some recovery... perhaps find a partner, though that would likely require convincing others that SNY indeed was sandbagging. If SNY wasn't sandbagging that would seem to bode ill for prospects... as it would at a minimum seem to indicate that a business model acceptable to a large pharma is something that has proven difficult to make work. Obviously they were as they wanted to ensure Toujeo was not knocked off before they can release it to the market. They had no issues putting out commercials for Toujeo, which was on significantly during the month of December here in NYC stations. Why couldn't they do the same for Afrezza??? We don't even know whether MNKD wanted to run TV adverts.
|
|