|
Post by BlueCat on Feb 10, 2016 19:47:15 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see with Shrek also in the news (the new Madoff?), whether this becomes a trendy election topic. Unlike Madoff, Shkreli succeeded, paid off his investors, and the end result was a new company with a market cap of some hundreds of millions. www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-17/martin-shkreli-accused-of-being-surprisingly-good-at-fraud"Shkreli seems to have gambled on redemption and won. If you believe the allegations in today's indictment, he lost (or stole) all of his investors' money, then lied to them to string them along, Ponzied it up by raising new money to keep them happy, and then finally found an investment that allowed him to pay off his earlier investors, with profits all around. He wasn't caught because his scheme, like most such schemes, eventually crashed under its own weight. His scheme worked!" He's just smarter, that's all.
|
|
|
Post by sluggobear on Feb 11, 2016 22:23:54 GMT -5
Here's what I wrote just now to the WSJ's reporters: Dear Denise and Noemie, I was glad to see your article this evening in the Wall Street Journal. I have family members with diabetes and have followed the Afrezza story closely over the past year. Since “any publicity is good publicity”, I’m happy more diabetics now will know about Afrezza. But there were significant omissions in your coverage (perhaps caused by lack of space) which may in fact end up discouraging diabetics from trying Afrezza. They include: * There was absolutely nothing “substantial” about their efforts. By any measure, Sanofi made only minimal efforts to promote Afrezza. There is evidence of only one or two poorly designed print ads and not one TV ad. There is no evidence whatsoever that they educated or encouraged their reps with any real commitment. * Thus it was much less a question of safety concerns with users of Afrezza (you’ve read the chat and seen the Youtube videos, I’m sure, about the across-the-board positive and in many instances life-changing experiences from diabetics about Afrezza), it was simply an issue that the vast majority of diabetics and many endoctrinologists have not yet even heard of Afrezza. * Through careful reading of one of the better discussion boards (e.g. ProBoards), you may likely suspect that Sanofi in fact clearly decided - likely from the moment the leadership passed to Mr. Brandicourt — to sandbag Afrezza, so it would not cut into sales of their Toujeo insulin. * One of the ways in which Sanofi sandbagged MannKind was to set and keep a premium price, as you noted. This is easily the reason many of the original adopters did not renew their prescriptions. (And of course, as you know, Mannkind will not venture any public statements on any of these issues as they are still negotiating with Sanofi the exact terms and timing of the termination agreement.) * Afrezza replicates exactly what the pancreas produces: it is the only insulin on the market that is a monomer, not a polymer, like injectable ones. This provides not only rapid uptake but also fast dispersal from the blood, which makes it much less likely to cause long-term health issues to other organs. Sincerely, TB I saw this posted on Mannkind page on Facebook: John K Charchar Is Mannkind going to respond to the WSJ article? They implied that Afrezza is a health risk. That can't be good for advertising. Like · Reply · 3 · Yesterday at 2:38pm MannKind Corporation MannKind Corporation CEO Matt Pfeffer has now been interviewed by the WSJ author, based on MannKind contacting her to provide comments after the article was published, and also because the author reported receiving many calls from upset Afrezza users. We will update this page and Twitter with any information on subsequent articles the WSJ may publish as a result. Unlike · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs
|
|
|
Post by kdaddyfresh2000 on Feb 12, 2016 14:34:04 GMT -5
Here's what I wrote just now to the WSJ's reporters: Dear Denise and Noemie, I was glad to see your article this evening in the Wall Street Journal. I have family members with diabetes and have followed the Afrezza story closely over the past year. Since “any publicity is good publicity”, I’m happy more diabetics now will know about Afrezza. But there were significant omissions in your coverage (perhaps caused by lack of space) which may in fact end up discouraging diabetics from trying Afrezza. They include: * There was absolutely nothing “substantial” about their efforts. By any measure, Sanofi made only minimal efforts to promote Afrezza. There is evidence of only one or two poorly designed print ads and not one TV ad. There is no evidence whatsoever that they educated or encouraged their reps with any real commitment. * Thus it was much less a question of safety concerns with users of Afrezza (you’ve read the chat and seen the Youtube videos, I’m sure, about the across-the-board positive and in many instances life-changing experiences from diabetics about Afrezza), it was simply an issue that the vast majority of diabetics and many endoctrinologists have not yet even heard of Afrezza. * Through careful reading of one of the better discussion boards (e.g. ProBoards), you may likely suspect that Sanofi in fact clearly decided - likely from the moment the leadership passed to Mr. Brandicourt — to sandbag Afrezza, so it would not cut into sales of their Toujeo insulin. * One of the ways in which Sanofi sandbagged MannKind was to set and keep a premium price, as you noted. This is easily the reason many of the original adopters did not renew their prescriptions. (And of course, as you know, Mannkind will not venture any public statements on any of these issues as they are still negotiating with Sanofi the exact terms and timing of the termination agreement.) * Afrezza replicates exactly what the pancreas produces: it is the only insulin on the market that is a monomer, not a polymer, like injectable ones. This provides not only rapid uptake but also fast dispersal from the blood, which makes it much less likely to cause long-term health issues to other organs. Sincerely, TB I saw this posted on Mannkind page on Facebook: John K Charchar Is Mannkind going to respond to the WSJ article? They implied that Afrezza is a health risk. That can't be good for advertising. Like · Reply · 3 · Yesterday at 2:38pm MannKind Corporation MannKind Corporation CEO Matt Pfeffer has now been interviewed by the WSJ author, based on MannKind contacting her to provide comments after the article was published, and also because the author reported receiving many calls from upset Afrezza users. We will update this page and Twitter with any information on subsequent articles the WSJ may publish as a result. Unlike · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs Hopefully, the WSJ wont publish the correction in 6 point type on page 39 at the bottom of the page. Again, why does not Matt issue a press release to refute this? Why wait for WSJ to correct the record?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 12, 2016 14:39:04 GMT -5
Hopefully, the WSJ wont publish the correction in 6 point type on page 39 at the bottom of the page. Again, why does not Matt issue a press release to refute this? Why wait for WSJ to correct the record? Press release likely wouldn't be seen by general population and it would create ill-will with the NYT author. Better to stay on good side and try to get future articles with positive comments/news. At least that is what I'd do.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Feb 12, 2016 14:48:57 GMT -5
Hopefully, the WSJ wont publish the correction in 6 point type on page 39 at the bottom of the page. Again, why does not Matt issue a press release to refute this? Why wait for WSJ to correct the record? Press release likely wouldn't be seen by general population and it would create ill-will with the NYT author. Better to stay on good side and try to get future articles with positive comments/news. At least that is what I'd do. Agree. And Matt has stated that it is not possible to refute every rumors and there is no need to. As long as Matt focuses on the big pictures and get those things took care of, we will be fine.
|
|
|
Post by kdaddyfresh2000 on Feb 12, 2016 16:39:43 GMT -5
Press release likely wouldn't be seen by general population and it would create ill-will with the NYT author. Better to stay on good side and try to get future articles with positive comments/news. At least that is what I'd do. Agree. And Matt has stated that it is not possible to refute every rumors and there is no need to. As long as Matt focuses on the big pictures and get those things took care of, we will be fine. I hope so. I just get tired of the slanderous hit pieces.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Feb 12, 2016 17:22:41 GMT -5
Agree. And Matt has stated that it is not possible to refute every rumors and there is no need to. As long as Matt focuses on the big pictures and get those things took care of, we will be fine. I hope so. I just get tired of the slanderous hit pieces. Our best friends are the Continuous glucose monitors, pictures of the crime screen. screencast.com/t/Ae0RBKtMZD
On the bright side, the pediatric study, type one's wearing continuous glucose monitors. We get that study. Granted it is "recruiting.'
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 12, 2016 18:25:52 GMT -5
I hope so. I just get tired of the slanderous hit pieces. Our best friends are the Continuous glucose monitors, pictures of the crime screen. screencast.com/t/Ae0RBKtMZD
On the bright side, the pediatric study, type one's wearing continuous glucose monitors. We get that study. Granted it is "recruiting.'
Though I seem to remember that the protocols are listed and the CGM is blinded in this study, so unfortunately it isn't being used for dynamic adjustment of dosing.
|
|
|
Post by kdaddyfresh2000 on Feb 12, 2016 18:56:54 GMT -5
Press release likely wouldn't be seen by general population and it would create ill-will with the NYT author. Better to stay on good side and try to get future articles with positive comments/news. At least that is what I'd do. Agree. And Matt has stated that it is not possible to refute every rumors and there is no need to. As long as Matt focuses on the big pictures and get those things took care of, we will be fine. I am of the Elon Musk opinion: punch a bully in the nose. I disagree that there is no need to refute bad press. Bad press becomes the truth. Ask any politician this. Plus, Matt's credibility is not very good. He said Sanofi was not mentioning Afrezza bc it was too small to mention. We know the real reason - now unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by benyiju on Feb 12, 2016 22:18:32 GMT -5
In fairness to Matt, he was probably making excuses for them like we were, hoping that Adam F and the rest of the naysayers were wrong. He may have had a sense where things might be headed, but if he knew for sure Sanofi was dumping us at that point I can't believe he would say that, if only for legal reasons.
|
|
|
Post by kball on Feb 13, 2016 8:52:41 GMT -5
Saw this on Afrezza.com and improved wording
Afrezza® is a registered trademark owned by MannKind Corporation. Manufactured by: MannKind Corporation, Danbury, CT 06810 Distributed Sandbagged by: sanofi-aventis U.S. LLC., Bridgewater, NJ 08807 A SANOFI COMPANY
|
|
|
Post by yash on Feb 13, 2016 9:45:02 GMT -5
Saw this on Afrezza.com and improved wording Afrezza® is a registered trademark owned by MannKind Corporation. Manufactured by: MannKind Corporation, Danbury, CT 06810 Distributed Sandbagged by: sanofi-aventis U.S. LLC., Bridgewater, NJ 08807 A SANOFI COMPANYLOL kball. Nice one.
|
|
|
Post by kc on Feb 13, 2016 10:06:08 GMT -5
Folks posted on the Yahoo message board that Google is terminating the relationship possibly on diabetes around February 24. I have not been able to find any story on termination of agreement with Sanofi by Google.
I hope google des terminate the Sanofi deal. Makes it nire exciting on the board.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 13, 2016 10:52:45 GMT -5
Folks posted on the Yahoo message board that Google is terminating the relationship possibly on diabetes around February 24. I have not been able to find any story on termination of agreement with Sanofi by Google. I hope google des terminate the Sanofi deal. Makes it nire exciting on the board. Wishful thinking on somebody's part however it's not going to happen. Sanofi wants to get into smart devices and Google wants to collect data, it's a perfect match. But then I never thought Sanofi would dump Mannkind so what do I know.
|
|
Tinkerbell
Researcher
Watcher of the Skies
Posts: 143
|
Post by Tinkerbell on Feb 13, 2016 17:26:02 GMT -5
I invested in MannKind and Sanofi with a long term view of a minimum of 20yrs. I liked both companies before they entered a partnership but welcomed the news when it happened. However, now it seems that this partnership has ended and I am stumped as to why it ended so soon. I am also disgruntled in how both companies have handled this partnership given the lacklustre sales of Afrezza and declining value of my investment in BOTH companies.
I knew that Exubera preceded Afrezza and was dropped by Pfizer for lackluster sales. Their large inhaler and regular acting inhalable insulin didn’t cut it with Drs nor patients. It's no secret that the current competition was going to play on Exubera’s 'ghost' to keep the inhalable 'barrier alive' in the minds of MDs. Who wouldn't use that? Commercializing Afrezza was certainly NOT going to be a cakewalk. It would take minimum 3 years. Senior managers at both MannKind and Sanofi should have known as much. Period.
I knew that Afrezza had a black box warning but then so does Acetomenophen. Anyone whose seen a drug commercial on the TV has also seen the list of potential hazards including fatality. Look at warnings for other inhalers. Same issue/different drug. This was a barrier that would need to be crossed and it would require at least 3 years of effort. Period.
I knew that a solution to provide support to new users of Afrezza was critical and was not provided initially. This was apparent in June 2015 and at the first sign of trouble, specialized clinics should have been set up asap. If this oversight on action to be taken asap was not intentional then it speaks to incompetence by Sr. Management on both sides.
I knew pricing was too high and a barrier to insurance by June 2015. The price should have been amended immediately and again, if this oversight was not intentional then it speaks to incompetence by Sr. Management on both sides.
I've been dumbfounded by the lack of Sanofi's effort to use more publicity to 'get the word out' about Afrezza. TV ads should have started last July/August after the soft launch. If this oversight was not intentional then it speaks to incompetence by Sr. Management on both sides.
I know some have said they don't like the Ad campaign "Surprise - it's Insulin." Sanofi and MannKind agreed to it so-that's that. Both are responsible.
I know some have said MannKind lawsuits are Sanofi's fault. Actually fault belongs to BOTH companies. One CEO is gone; the other will soon follow. Shorts have taken advantage of weak Sr Management. You can't fault them entirely though lawbreakers should be dealt with severely. Try $ 25 billion dollar fines. That should do it.
When the SNY partnership was first announced, I figured they would need at a minimum 36 months to iron out all the kinks to secure Afrezza's commercial success in the US and then overseas. But, a decision to drop the partnership was made and in a timeframe that I as an investor (in BOTH companies) would never have agreed to. So now MannKind and Sanofi need to move on - AND - they had better do so successfully. Period.
There remains one important item which MannKind must analyze carefully to ensure Sanofi's efforts to market Afrezza were in fact steadfast. Once that analysis has been completed, there will be finite clarity on all of Sanofi's commercialization efforts in the US since last February. To that aim, I addressed the following to both companies last month.
I pointed out that the single most important aspect of the upcoming Sanofi-to-MannKind transition needed to include the hand over of every single Sanofi sales call report from every single Sanofi/contract sales rep across the USA that had been out in the field since February of 2015 visiting MDs about Afrezza. The reason I pointed this out was that during a transition from one sales team to another, one would expect that the outgoing Sanofi sales rep provide the 'low down' to the incoming MannKind sales representative so they can quickly pick up where the other left off. I think it will become apparent during review of these sales reports precisely how the sales plan was executed and with what resolve. The sales plan should also be turned over because it was part of the agreement to oversee successful sales which did not materialize. There is little sense in repeating a failed plan but reviewing it should provide clues on what NOT TO do moving forward.
MannKind met their obligations to produce the needed volume of Afrezza AND deliver it on time to Sanofi. In doing so, they earned the appropriate milestones. Sanofi was in charge of the sales aspect of this partnerhsip so sales reports must be handed over in the transition and action plans discussed to ensure next steps. Hopefully both MannKind and Sanofi will rise to the occasion and provide a smooth transition including providing monies to MannKind to ensure it does not go into bankruptcy. I expect that from Sanofi. However if both companies continue to act unprofessionally during this critical time (i.e. Sanofi's WSJ article), then, I will have no choice but to join lawsuits against both companies and as a Lead Plaintiff because I will not stand idly by while incompetent Sr. Management rules my future investment in both companies. Period. End of Quote.
|
|