|
|
Post by parrerob on Jan 12, 2016 13:12:53 GMT -5
good read.
|
|
|
|
Post by brentie on Jan 12, 2016 13:16:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jan 12, 2016 13:22:09 GMT -5
"only 35% of the 6000 patients who have ever started on Afrezza are still using it"
I never realized it was quite that bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by parrerob on Jan 12, 2016 13:25:18 GMT -5
Now including Nate Pile comment |
|
|
|
Post by jefferson on Jan 12, 2016 13:30:23 GMT -5
Can someone post the text? I don't like to give SA the clicks
|
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jan 12, 2016 13:35:05 GMT -5
Can someone post the text? I don't like to give SA the clicks If you respect Rho enough to want to read his article, respect him enough to give him your click. It costs you nothing. JMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by lorcan458 on Jan 12, 2016 13:43:14 GMT -5
"only 35% of the 6000 patients who have ever started on Afrezza are still using it" I never realized it was quite that bad. Does that count the people who started on free samples assuming Sanofi would get insurance coverage imminently? I think the answer is Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by jefferson on Jan 12, 2016 13:47:39 GMT -5
Can someone post the text? I don't like to give SA the clicks If you respect Rho enough to want to read his article, respect him enough to give him your click. It costs you nothing. JMHO. I have to sign up for SA. Polishing the brass on the Titanic at this point; if someone posts it fine, if not, meh. |
|
|
|
Post by dictatorsaurus on Jan 12, 2016 13:51:03 GMT -5
I don't know what these articles add besides what everyone knows already. Kind of state the obvious. Company is in trouble but there might be hope...hmm ok!
|
|
|
|
Post by mindovermatter on Jan 12, 2016 13:58:07 GMT -5
I don't know what these articles add besides what everyone knows already. Kind of state the obvious. Company is in trouble but there might be hope...hmm ok! They don't add anything other than $ in the pocket of the article's author while it might not be much. The vast majority of the pumpers were horribly wrong about Mannkind so far. The fudsters/shorts were right on the money. Good drugs won't have a chance if they don't have the backing of insurance and doctors along with good marketing. Afrezza failed on all fronts. |
|
|
|
Post by jefferson on Jan 12, 2016 14:00:06 GMT -5
SFY sandbagged the marketing. Collusion with wall st. Cause and effect. End of story.
|
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 12, 2016 14:03:06 GMT -5
Nate's comment to the article: seekingalpha.com/user/18076342/commentsThanks for the article, George. As one of the few people out there that can say "I know exactly where you're coming from" and really mean it, I appreciate you taking the time share your thoughts during these challenging times for MannKind longs. Like you, I've spent a sizable chunk of time lately dissecting the story for my subscribers in an attempt to understand where things went wrong, what can be changed, and, perhaps most importantly, what we should be doing about it from an investment standpoint. As you know, I share your belief that not only does the the drug work, it seems to work very, very well; unfortunately, as has been the case with every other "next generation" insulin over the past 50 years, it appears that it is going to take awhile for it to catch on (all the docs I talked to about it pre-launch warned me their colleagues would be slow to switch - and it turns out they were right!)... and it remains to be seen whether MannKind will still be involved with the story when that inflection point is finally reached. Obviously, if it turns out that "rapid-acting" really is "good enough" for the rest of time, Afrezza (and therefore MannKind) is probably doomed; however, given the advances being made in the management of diabetes, I believe the odds are very high that, at some point, "ultra rapid acting" is going to become the new norm (in the same way that rapid-acting eventually replaced fast-acting)... and regardless of what the label currently says, we all know that, at least for now, ultra-rapid means Afrezza (and only Afrezza). As you mention, there are plenty of possible roads the company can take from here... and if it manages to pick one that leads to success, getting to buy into the Afrezza (and TS) story when MannKind has a market cap of under $300M will likely prove to be one of the best opportunities most investors will come across in their lifetimes (and, of course, there is the very real possibility that they may instead wind up on a road that does not lead to success). This has been one of the craziest stories I've ever seen unfold in my 28 years following biotech... and it wouldn't surprise me at all if there are still a few "twists" left to come in the story (including finding out how the extra 50% of the float that has been dumped on the market ends up being unwound... is Afrezza really worth $0?). Anyhow, thanks again for taking the time to put this article together... here's to hoping the tide's about to turn. |
|
|
|
Post by kball on Jan 12, 2016 14:04:57 GMT -5
Feels like George gets a lot of his building blocks for the story from Proboard posts
|
|
|
|
Post by dictatorsaurus on Jan 12, 2016 14:05:20 GMT -5
I don't know what these articles add besides what everyone knows already. Kind of state the obvious. Company is in trouble but there might be hope...hmm ok! They don't add anything other than $ in the pocket of the article's author while it might not be much. The vast majority of the pumpers were horribly wrong about Mannkind so far. The fudsters/shorts were right on the money. Good drugs won't have a chance if they don't have the backing of insurance and doctors along with good marketing. Afrezza failed on all fronts. I agree. The shorts nailed it and we got screwed. I really thought the drug was going to take off. It's mind boggling how quick everything went down the toilet. |
|
|
|
Post by karma2 on Jan 12, 2016 14:13:17 GMT -5
It looks like disruptive technologies in non-medical settings (Netflix, Uber, iPhone etc.) is easier to switch customers. I am sensing that unless an individual is in an 'end-of-life" situation, changing medical protocols is a tall order.
|
|
