Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2017 10:07:38 GMT -5
The deal gave Receptor Life Sciences a license to use the Technosphere technology to manufacture their own product(s). RLS could simply be setting up manufacturing and refining the process in one or more plants in the USA and Canada. If the Investor Overview sheet we saw is legitimate, it states that several plants are in the planning. wouldnt be it wise to use Mannkind facility and use Mannkind personnel rather than a new facility from ground up? and the license for controlled substance as I recall was just for the lab where formultaion tests are done? |
|
|
|
Post by kc on Jan 27, 2017 10:10:20 GMT -5
The deal gave Receptor Life Sciences a license to use the Technosphere technology to manufacture their own product(s). RLS could simply be setting up manufacturing and refining the process in one or more plants in the USA and Canada. If the Investor Overview sheet we saw is legitimate, it states that several plants are in the planning. wouldnt be it wise to use Mannkind facility and use Mannkind personnel rather than a new facility from ground up? and the license for controlled substance as I recall was just for the lab where formultaion tests are done? Probably not legal in CT. |
|
|
|
Post by myocat on Mar 17, 2017 12:31:46 GMT -5
Mnkd received 1 mil as of Dec 30, 2016 the deal was up to $102.25 million as development and commercialization milestones, along with mid-single to low double-digit royalties, on net product sales.. I wonder when will be the next milestone payment(s)....?
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 17, 2017 12:44:24 GMT -5
Mnkd received 1 mil as of Dec 30, 2016 the deal was up to $102.25 million as development and commercialization milestones, along with mid-single to low double-digit royalties, on net product sales.. I wonder when will be the next milestone payment(s)....? I did/do hope that the second milestone is much larger and coming soon enough to add at 2 or 3 months before we need to dilute. However, I am now also concerned that the change in political landscape with regard to legality of marijuana may cause delays or even termination of RLS efforts. I'd be very concerned if I were an investor in RLS. So... are the milestones under MNKD control or are they under RLS control? If the latter, I can easily imagine that things might have looked much better for timing of payments when the deal was first done than they now do. This could have been yet another blow to MNKD from an external source. Just pure speculation on my part. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Mar 17, 2017 12:48:37 GMT -5
Well, DBC, I'm sure you heard that Sessions said that marijuana is only slightly less dangerous than heroine. I'm sure he's never tried any, he should.
|
|
|
|
Post by myocat on Mar 17, 2017 13:00:37 GMT -5
well, he needs to watch Cheech and Chong movies LOL... I think 20+ weed legalized states will push back.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 17, 2017 13:49:44 GMT -5
well, he needs to watch Cheech and Chong movies LOL... I think 20+ weed legalized states will push back. Even with push back and if we manage to keep the status quo with regard to the current situation state by state, companies wishing to develop real pharma products are still subject to federal regulation. I would be very hesitant as an investor to spend hundreds of millions bringing a marijuana based API through clinical trials under the current administration. Likewise due to threats from feds regarding banking, etc. I'd be hesitant to get into the recreational or shadow "medical" market if I were really trying to develop FDA approved drug. The leaked business model of RLS, in my opinion, seems very perilous in an environment not headed towards federal decriminalization. Maybe the backers have very deep pockets and can afford to forge ahead without concern for whether we have a 4 or 8 year setback in decriminalizing marijuana. |
|
|
|
Post by Cowgirl on Mar 17, 2017 14:23:46 GMT -5
Given this is MNKD...any milestones are most likely RLS controlled.
Agree with your comments.
|
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Mar 17, 2017 14:50:42 GMT -5
Well, DBC, I'm sure you heard that Sessions said that marijuana is only slightly less dangerous than heroine. I'm sure he's never tried any, he should. Jeff Sessions, proudly taking our country backwards 30 years. "Just Say No!" |
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Mar 17, 2017 15:19:24 GMT -5
well, he needs to watch Cheech and Chong movies LOL... I think 20+ weed legalized states will push back. Even with push back and if we manage to keep the status quo with regard to the current situation state by state, companies wishing to develop real pharma products are still subject to federal regulation. I would be very hesitant as an investor to spend hundreds of millions bringing a marijuana based API through clinical trials under the current administration. Likewise due to threats from feds regarding banking, etc. I'd be hesitant to get into the recreational or shadow "medical" market if I were really trying to develop FDA approved drug. The leaked business model of RLS, in my opinion, seems very perilous in an environment not headed towards federal decriminalization. Maybe the backers have very deep pockets and can afford to forge ahead without concern for whether we have a 4 or 8 year setback in decriminalizing marijuana. I am failing to understand the concern. RLS started out as making an FDA approved prescription drug containing mostly CBD with some small amount of TCH as there is some belief TCH makes the CBD work better and at different ratios for different diseases. The source material is a controlled substance but I see no issues in moving forward with this. The recreational product was a real surprise to me but given a lot of TCH will be left over from the extraction process for the medical CBD use, why not. Maybe this gets effected with Trump, probably not. GWPH closed at 123pps today and RLS should have a better product. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 17, 2017 16:53:24 GMT -5
Even with push back and if we manage to keep the status quo with regard to the current situation state by state, companies wishing to develop real pharma products are still subject to federal regulation. I would be very hesitant as an investor to spend hundreds of millions bringing a marijuana based API through clinical trials under the current administration. Likewise due to threats from feds regarding banking, etc. I'd be hesitant to get into the recreational or shadow "medical" market if I were really trying to develop FDA approved drug. The leaked business model of RLS, in my opinion, seems very perilous in an environment not headed towards federal decriminalization. Maybe the backers have very deep pockets and can afford to forge ahead without concern for whether we have a 4 or 8 year setback in decriminalizing marijuana. I am failing to understand the concern. RLS started out as making an FDA approved prescription drug containing mostly CBD with some small amount of TCH as there is some belief TCH makes the CBD work better and at different ratios for different diseases. The source material is a controlled substance but I see no issues in moving forward with this. The recreational product was a real surprise to me but given a lot of TCH will be left over from the extraction process for the medical CBD use, why not. Maybe this gets effected with Trump, probably not. GWPH closed at 123pps today and RLS should have a better product. I'd be concerned to be an investor knowing that Feds may well be hostile to marijuana for 4... or possibly even 8 years. Perhaps you wouldn't as an investor. GWPH is not based in US. I in fact invested early in GWPH and still hold shares. Just wish I had invested the large amount I did in MNKD in GWPH and vice versa. Being in CA, and having contacts within the entrepreneur/VC community. I certainly have seen a change in attitude about the cannabis industry. There is still some interest, but it is not the same sort of wide eyed lust that some were previously exhibiting as they thought decriminalization and drug schedule reclassification was inevitable. The couple of presentation slides I've seen for RLS didn't talk about specific formulation as an FDA target. Where are you getting your information that it is mostly CBD with small amount of TCH? Do you have some source of info directly from RLS? There may well be some sound reason to do that. Just trying to distinguish educated guesses from actual hard facts you have about RLS. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 17, 2017 16:58:38 GMT -5
I am failing to understand the concern. RLS started out as making an FDA approved prescription drug containing mostly CBD with some small amount of TCH as there is some belief TCH makes the CBD work better and at different ratios for different diseases. The source material is a controlled substance but I see no issues in moving forward with this. The recreational product was a real surprise to me but given a lot of TCH will be left over from the extraction process for the medical CBD use, why not. Maybe this gets effected with Trump, probably not. GWPH closed at 123pps today and RLS should have a better product. I'd be concerned to be an investor knowing that Feds may well be hostile to marijuana for 4... or possibly even 8 years. Perhaps you wouldn't as an investor. GWPH is not based in US. I in fact invested early in GWPH and still hold shares. Just wish I had invested the large amount I did in MNKD in GWPH and vice versa. Being in CA, and having contacts within the entrepreneur/VC community. I certainly have seen a change in attitude about the cannabis industry. There is still some interest, but it is not the same sort of wide eyed lust that some were previously exhibiting as they thought decriminalization and drug schedule reclassification was inevitable. The couple of presentation slides I've seen for RLS didn't talk about specific formulation as an FDA target. Where are you getting your information that it is mostly CBD with small amount of TCH? Do you have some source of info directly from RLS? There may well be some sound reason to do that. Just trying to distinguish educated guesses from actual hard facts you have about RLS. The initial API IC 005. US 006 018 044 046 051 052. G & S: pharmaceutical preparations for human use; inhalers sold pre-filled with pharmaceutical preparations; plant extracts for pharmaceutical purposes
IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: scientific and medical research relating to the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions; scientific and medical research relating to plant extracts for pharmaceutical purposes
IC 044. US 100 101. G & S: providing a website featuring information relating to the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions
page 14 this thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 17, 2017 17:05:38 GMT -5
I'd be concerned to be an investor knowing that Feds may well be hostile to marijuana for 4... or possibly even 8 years. Perhaps you wouldn't as an investor. GWPH is not based in US. I in fact invested early in GWPH and still hold shares. Just wish I had invested the large amount I did in MNKD in GWPH and vice versa. Being in CA, and having contacts within the entrepreneur/VC community. I certainly have seen a change in attitude about the cannabis industry. There is still some interest, but it is not the same sort of wide eyed lust that some were previously exhibiting as they thought decriminalization and drug schedule reclassification was inevitable. The couple of presentation slides I've seen for RLS didn't talk about specific formulation as an FDA target. Where are you getting your information that it is mostly CBD with small amount of TCH? Do you have some source of info directly from RLS? There may well be some sound reason to do that. Just trying to distinguish educated guesses from actual hard facts you have about RLS. The initial API IC 005. US 006 018 044 046 051 052. G & S: pharmaceutical preparations for human use; inhalers sold pre-filled with pharmaceutical preparations; plant extracts for pharmaceutical purposes
IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: scientific and medical research relating to the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions; scientific and medical research relating to plant extracts for pharmaceutical purposes
IC 044. US 100 101. G & S: providing a website featuring information relating to the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions
page 14 this thread.
I think the fact that they are doing cannabis based products is well established not only from those trademark registrations but also from the accidently leaked presentation material from Oct. I was just asking if Seyhey actually knows facts about a particular RLS formulation. |
|
|
|
Post by falconquest on Mar 17, 2017 17:06:58 GMT -5
I am failing to understand the concern. RLS started out as making an FDA approved prescription drug containing mostly CBD with some small amount of TCH as there is some belief TCH makes the CBD work better and at different ratios for different diseases. The source material is a controlled substance but I see no issues in moving forward with this. The recreational product was a real surprise to me but given a lot of TCH will be left over from the extraction process for the medical CBD use, why not. Maybe this gets effected with Trump, probably not. GWPH closed at 123pps today and RLS should have a better product. I'd be concerned to be an investor knowing that Feds may well be hostile to marijuana for 4... or possibly even 8 years. Perhaps you wouldn't as an investor. GWPH is not based in US. I in fact invested early in GWPH and still hold shares. Just wish I had invested the large amount I did in MNKD in GWPH and vice versa. Being in CA, and having contacts within the entrepreneur/VC community. I certainly have seen a change in attitude about the cannabis industry. There is still some interest, but it is not the same sort of wide eyed lust that some were previously exhibiting as they thought decriminalization and drug schedule reclassification was inevitable. The couple of presentation slides I've seen for RLS didn't talk about specific formulation as an FDA target. Where are you getting your information that it is mostly CBD with small amount of TCH? Do you have some source of info directly from RLS? There may well be some sound reason to do that. Just trying to distinguish educated guesses from actual hard facts you have about RLS. This is exactly what I was thinking. Do we know for fact what exactly RLS is developing or is this all speculation? My guess is we have very few hard facts. |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 17, 2017 17:57:53 GMT -5
Do you think Receptor would have parted with a $1 million milestone payment if they were abandoning development? That wouldn't make sense. If the leaked investor sheet was legitimate, then RLS is also planning on manufacturing in Canada, close to the Northwest region of the USA and California. I'm thinking there will be much less competition in the medical marijuana space than there will be in recreational pot, so the appointment of Jeff Sessions as attorney general would not have as drastic an impact on RLS as it would on US-based weed farms.
Still, it probably comes down to financial backing that will determine the pace at which RLS develops their pipeline (no pun intended).
|
|
