|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Feb 9, 2016 3:01:04 GMT -5
I could see a payment in kind. At the end of the Exubera deal Pfizer offered their Exubera stockpile to Nektar at a 50% discount, Sanofi might do the same if MNKD release them from the requirement to provide 180 day sales cover after the termination date. Right now Sanofi have blown through $400 million in just over a year so they might be feeling a bit burnt. It's really hard to imagine where that $400 million has gone. How much do the magazine DTC's cost? Direct mailing? I'm sure the seminars are pricey, I know the trials are, and of course sales staff, but did they ever have significant salesforce numbers on Afrezza alone? Does that $400mill include their reps selling Toujeo as well (read 'primarily')? Is MNKD's 35% of expenses subsidising SNYs Toujeo sales? It still doesn't add up to $400 million. An audit threat might be one way to get Sanofi to offer a parting gift... The $400m is a number created by SNY with the intend to show that they tried. Easy to tune these numbers on several levels of aggregation. And difficult to verify in such a huge organisation. |
|
|
|
Post by factspls88 on Feb 9, 2016 18:53:37 GMT -5
I should probably let Matt answer this but since I have started I will try.The 170 million number is based on Mannkind having borrowed $43.7 million over three quarters at a rate that is increasing by about $1 million per quarter which gets us to about $60 million over the full year and represents 35% of the shared cost. Therefore the full cost is $170 million and while Sanofi is directly responsible for $110 million at the moment it has paid everything. If it comes to court the headline number is what Sanofi will present as this is what Afrezza has cost them to date. The rest is up to the lawyers. Thanks for the response. Sanofi can present whatever they want to the court, but what they spent on Afrezza does not represent what they spent to commercialize it in my opinion. As for the borrowing for the 3 quarters, it's late now so I'll take a look in the next day or so. I'm wondering if the full amount can be assumed to have been spent on commercializing or if it includes borrowing to keep Mannkind's operations afloat (I suspect the latter but maybe I'm wrong). Have a good night  Here's a quote from today's article regarding Sanofi spending on Afrezza: "By ending the agreement when it did, Sanofi capped its 2015 losses at roughly EUR200 million, according to the company." Since this refers only to 2015, I am assuming that the $50MM milestone payment (essentially an incentive to get manufacturing up and running quickly) is part of the $200MM (I'm assuming euro at parity to the dollar) since they are not referring specifically to commercialization expenses. That leaves $150MM in other expenses directly attributable to Mannkind, be they marketing, promotion, staffing, travel, clinical studies etc. The $150MM upfront payment was late 2014. Read more: www.nasdaq.com/article/sanofi-is-forced-to-end-latest-diabetes-effort-20160209-01284#ixzz3ziPhxubC |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 9, 2016 21:29:50 GMT -5
Thanks for the response. Sanofi can present whatever they want to the court, but what they spent on Afrezza does not represent what they spent to commercialize it in my opinion. As for the borrowing for the 3 quarters, it's late now so I'll take a look in the next day or so. I'm wondering if the full amount can be assumed to have been spent on commercializing or if it includes borrowing to keep Mannkind's operations afloat (I suspect the latter but maybe I'm wrong). Have a good night Here's a quote from today's article regarding Sanofi spending on Afrezza: "By ending the agreement when it did, Sanofi capped its 2015 losses at roughly EUR200 million, according to the company." Since this refers only to 2015, I am assuming that the $50MM milestone payment (essentially an incentive to get manufacturing up and running quickly) is part of the $200MM (I'm assuming euro at parity to the dollar) since they are not referring specifically to commercialization expenses. That leaves $150MM in other expenses directly attributable to Mannkind, be they marketing, promotion, staffing, travel, clinical studies etc. The $150MM upfront payment was late 2014. Read more: www.nasdaq.com/article/sanofi-is-forced-to-end-latest-diabetes-effort-20160209-01284#ixzz3ziPhxubCThat would make sense. I would not argue the difference between $170 million and $150 million for the total joint cost. (20 million here, 20 million there, soon we are talking about real money  ) |
|
|
|
Post by kball on Feb 10, 2016 10:25:09 GMT -5
58 votes now with the majority feeling the company is ok for 6 months or longer w/o cash infusion?
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 10, 2016 14:37:15 GMT -5
58 votes now with the majority feeling the company is ok for 6 months or longer w/o cash infusion? Though 11 people seem to be unaware of MNKD's situation. With no cash infusion, I'd say in 6 months we'd be a lot closer to "crisis" than to "ok". Some people's definition of crisis may vary, but I don't think anybody will confuse the situation for "ok". I don't even consider things "ok" right now regarding cash situation vs what MNKD needs to accomplish. |
|
|
|
Post by kball on Feb 10, 2016 20:05:36 GMT -5
58 votes now with the majority feeling the company is ok for 6 months or longer w/o cash infusion? Though 11 people seem to be unaware of MNKD's situation.
With no cash infusion, I'd say in 6 months we'd be a lot closer to "crisis" than to "ok". Some people's definition of crisis may vary, but I don't think anybody will confuse the situation for "ok". I don't even consider things "ok" right now regarding cash situation vs what MNKD needs to accomplish. I was pointing out the oddness of the poll results, DBC. Not that i found it comforting. I voted 1-3. Bad things always seem to come sooner, good things later w mannkind |
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Feb 10, 2016 21:02:17 GMT -5
I would say they are in crisis now. When would a company with only about 6 mos or so left in cash not be in crisis?
Its a JJ Wentworth - They need cash NOW!
That said, I take Matt at word to say they have enough to get through til second half. That means according to poll, they will need cash infusion (or dramatic reduction in costs) in second half to stay afloat. 6-9 months.
Question is whether SNY handcuffs make that possible. Can't wait to see what rabbit gets pulled out on this one. TASE was the last surprise...
|
|
|
|
Post by jpg on Feb 10, 2016 21:21:33 GMT -5
I voted 1-3 months simply because there wasn't a choice for Mannkind is now actively in the middle of a crisis. The share price tends to agree with me on that one (and anyone saying it is simply being manipulated down is playing ostrich). The crisis is now.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldfishtowner on Feb 11, 2016 19:48:28 GMT -5
I voted 1-3 months simply because there wasn't a choice for Mannkind is now actively in the middle of a crisis. The share price tends to agree with me on that one (and anyone saying it is simply being manipulated down is playing ostrich). The crisis is now. If MNKD is only viable for 3 months, or even 6 months, absent a source of more cash, would that trigger a going concern warning in the annual report? What impact would that have? Is that the next shoe to fall that shorts are waiting for? While the report is for FY 2015, I do not see how the auditors can ignore the current situation. On the other hand, I have invested in several companies that have been in a fiscal crunch as bad as MNKD's and have survived going concern warnings in their quarterly or annual reports. Still, I think such a warning would impact the stock price in the near term and has the potential to complicate any negotiations MNKD has with creditors or possible partners. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 11, 2016 19:55:12 GMT -5
If MNKD is only viable for 3 months, or even 6 months, absent a source of more cash, would that trigger a going concern warning in the annual report? What impact would that have? Is that the next shoe to fall that shorts are waiting for? While the report is for FY 2015, I do not see how the auditors can ignore the current situation. On the other hand, I have invested in several companies that have been in a fiscal crunch as bad as MNKD's and have survived going concern warnings in their quarterly or annual reports. Still, I think such a warning would impact the stock price in the near term and has the potential to complicate any negotiations MNKD has with creditors or possible partners. Yes, I'd certainly think there would be that warning. Don't you think that is already baked into price? I mean it is pretty obvious what the situation is. We're so far away from being cash flow positive on revenues to not even be a consideration, so the statement about a going concern will have to point out that they are dependent on raising cash through partnerships, capital markets, etc. and that there is no assurance these will happen before they go bankrupt. |
|
|
|
Post by kball on Feb 11, 2016 20:07:14 GMT -5
I voted 1-3 months simply because there wasn't a choice for Mannkind is now actively in the middle of a crisis. The share price tends to agree with me on that one (and anyone saying it is simply being manipulated down is playing ostrich). The crisis is now. What impact would that have? Is that the next shoe to fall that shorts are waiting for? While the report is for FY 2015, I do not see how the auditors can ignore the current situation. On the other hand, I have invested in several companies that have been in a fiscal crunch as bad as MNKD's and have survived going concern warnings in their quarterly or annual reports. Still, I think such a warning would impact the stock price in the near term and has the potential to complicate any negotiations MNKD has with creditors or possible partners. There's already quite a bit of language in November's 10-Q warning about going concern "should" the partnership with Sanofi end. Also mannkinds ability or lack of ability to find or raise adequate sources of cash. Its available at mannkinds website. I would think the report due out end of this month would have similar wording, if not more dire. |
|
|
|
Post by oldfishtowner on Feb 11, 2016 22:25:01 GMT -5
If MNKD is only viable for 3 months, or even 6 months, absent a source of more cash, would that trigger a going concern warning in the annual report? What impact would that have? Is that the next shoe to fall that shorts are waiting for? While the report is for FY 2015, I do not see how the auditors can ignore the current situation. On the other hand, I have invested in several companies that have been in a fiscal crunch as bad as MNKD's and have survived going concern warnings in their quarterly or annual reports. Still, I think such a warning would impact the stock price in the near term and has the potential to complicate any negotiations MNKD has with creditors or possible partners. There's already quite a bit of language in November's 10-Q warning about going concern "should" the partnership with Sanofi end. Also mannkinds ability or lack of ability to find or raise adequate sources of cash. Its available at mannkinds website. I would think the report due out end of this month would have similar wording, if not more dire. I think you are referring to MNKD's discussion of risks. That is not an auditor's statement that there is doubt as to whether MNKD ability continue as a going concern, which would carry much more weight than the company's discussion of risks as a disclaimer. An auditor's statement would raise the issue to another level. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2016 22:36:23 GMT -5
I' had traded Mnkd a couple times this week. Decided on Selling my Ira shares and just holding my cash account shares. I'm more then 30 years away from retiring. I'd rather try and make something out of the 10k then ride this to zero. This is a previous job 401k rolled over after getting new job. Things get better I'll jump right back in.
|
|
|
|
Post by benyiju on Feb 11, 2016 22:41:08 GMT -5
I' had traded Mnkd a couple times this week. Decided on Selling my Ira shares and just holding my cash account shares. I'm more then 30 years away from retiring. I'd rather try and make something out of the 10k then ride this to zero. This is a previous job 401k rolled over after getting new job. Things get better I'll jump right back in. What would constitute "better"? |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Feb 11, 2016 22:45:36 GMT -5
Status Quo until April 5th. Nothing will happen until after that date.
|
|
)
