|
Odds
Feb 4, 2016 15:50:14 GMT -5
fedakd likes this
Post by hankscorpio7 on Feb 4, 2016 15:50:14 GMT -5
Maybe someone can point to the actual section of the partnership agreement that specifies damages? I don't see one. My interpretation- if they didn't do their part, have amount of time to fix, or deal is off. That is it. Yes, a leaked email among SNY officers confirming a sand bag plan- you have a case. But- if MNKD can focus on increasing awareness in a given market- say around a new diabetic clinic and there is even 50 scripts in a week from that area- SNY might be very eager to buy their silence. Maybe some fervent shareholders in that area may wish to aid in greatly embarrassing SNY.
|
|
|
Odds
Feb 4, 2016 16:08:44 GMT -5
Post by mnkdfann on Feb 4, 2016 16:08:44 GMT -5
A trustee representing Genzyme rights holders sued Sanofi claiming it stalled the development of a multiple sclerosis drug to avoid paying at least $708 million.
Sanofi broke its 2011 merger agreement with Genzyme by failing to use “diligent efforts” to win regulatory approval and reach sales targets for the drug Lemtrada, the trustee, American Stock Transfer & Trust Co., said in a complaint filed Monday in Manhattan federal court.
The agreement specified that holders of Genzyme stock receive rights to $3.8 billion in payments if the drug reached certain milestones, including approval from the US Food and Drug Administration by March 31, 2014, according to the trustee.
“Sanofi took those potential milestone payments into account in evaluating Lemtrada’s profitability, embarked on a slow path to FDA approval and departed from its own drug commercialization patterns and those of others in the industry,” the trustee claimed in Monday’s complaint. “As a result, Sanofi missed the contractual milestones and skirted its payment obligations of at least $708 million.”
Mary Kathryn Steel, a Sanofi spokeswoman, didn’t immediately return a voice-mail message seeking comment on the suit.
Source: www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/11/09/sanofi-sued-over-development-multiple-sclerosis-drug/El1imaJnShEoRVa2ywpywJ/story.html Right, as I said in the post above. A former partner is NOT suing SNY. Rather, a legal firm is trying a class action. The 'partner' Genzyme is actually a SNY subsidiary and is NOT suing. Some keep misrepresenting this, perhaps unknowingly.
|
|
|
Odds
Feb 4, 2016 17:49:28 GMT -5
Post by peppy on Feb 4, 2016 17:49:28 GMT -5
Maybe MNKD will ask for the balance of the $725M owed. ie., $725M less any milestones paid. That would definitely shape up the balance sheet. Simply asking doesn't do anything for the balance sheet. Getting anywhere near that amount would seem to me about as likely as MNKD finding a lottery ticket worth that much. Remember, there was a Joint Advisory Committee where all budgets and sales and marketing activities were approved by both companies. Unless there is some extremely unlikely smoking gun, such as an email from the new SNY CEO stating he wanted to sandbag Afrezza, the amount MNKD is likely to get is the equivalent of what companies routinely offer to employees they let go to get them to sign release documents when they have no reason to suspect there is any real risk. A smoking gun would be if it could be proved Sanofi shorted MNKD stock.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Feb 4, 2016 17:57:30 GMT -5
DBC, have you given up any hope of debt financing from Al? There's got to be some chance of that. I finally listened to the conference call last night, it was fine. Would have loved to have heard better, but wasn't expecting it, so soon after last call. He touched very lightly on financing, so I hope that means he's got something in the works he can share at the quarterly call. Lots of traders dumped their stock in AH, as they had only gotten in hoping for a revelation during this call - fat chance, they acted like rookies! I suppose that could be added to the list. I guess I'm not considering that as probable, or if it does happen it will be very last resort to bridge the gap as they find some way to sell things off, saving Afrezza for patients but likely not leaving shareholders with much. If he really had the resources left and desire to do this, it seems the time has already come for him to have stepped in, such as dealing with the convertible debt. Hear you loud and clear, DBC, however, if I'm Matt and I have been told by Al that he has some money available, I would wait until I had an interested potential marketing partner (a large one, not just a small, regional one), and then, when the partner says (partially to drive a harder bargain), "I like the deal, but geez is it ever risky dealing with a company with cash problems," then I say, "well, let me see if with your involvement, Al will consider fattening our line of credit."
|
|
|
Post by kc on Feb 4, 2016 22:38:17 GMT -5
Matt, first we get a plan moving forward. than you work on the liability of what sanofi didn't do.
|
|
|
Post by tchalaa on Feb 5, 2016 6:14:26 GMT -5
Sanofi invested millions up-front to acquire the rights to the drug and then spent over $20 million dollars a month in 2015 to try and launch Afrezza. Do you really want to spend MNKD's remaining cash for lawyers to try and convince a judge that Sanofi's efforts were not serious? To your question I'll answer NO and since as you clearly mentioned the issue here is known i.e Cash Cash and Cash we can focus on the solution. This being how does MNKD keep cash flowing. As any business evolution, MNKD has the luxury to have gone past the stage of heavy investment (initial phase) till prove-of-concept; now we are at the stage I will call "make it" or "break it" being "Marketing and Sales" and here key is how do you keep the company running, cash flowing? The last stage is profitability, because you can run steadily you need to refund your investment to nurture your profit. To be able to pass the "Marketing and Sales" you seriously need financial discipline before having all the cash. It is true we had some cash for manufacturing but the marketing failed, by implication sales failed also. Nevertheless, the role of CFO and CEO are mostly separated in a business because while the CFO strictly focus on the money the CEO uses the output of the CFO to sustain Business operations and seeks business opportunities, doing this management wont become capital driven. In MNKD current situation we need a capital driven management, so the move was already a wonderful strategic one, having the CFO becoming CEO and maintaining the CFO position. This will reinforce much more financial discipline as we have been seeing, also will unconsciously and consciously keep us on a cash flow mission -money makes business run and a running business brings money in- while marketers and sales hopefully will be doing a great job. For me now the good thing is that we are working on how to sustain cash-flow which is where investors look. It will take time but this is a winning game, there is NO BK because if the sweets cant be sold the machine producing them will surely be sold!
|
|