Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2016 17:06:09 GMT -5
No, if MNKD is doing any sales/marketing, Afrezza is not going to be cashflow positive. With the loan facility, all Afrezza activities were cash flow neutral for MNKD. Certainly, that cash coming in should be counted as to how long the runway is, but having SNY bail is not extending the runway as MNKD is certainly taking on more cash burn than the 65% of the revenue will cover. Ok I did the math. Last quarter where we have numbers Mannkind drew down $14.7 million as it's share of the losses so the total losses would be about $42 million, giving an increase in the burn rate of $13 million per month minus monthly sales. Obviously any future operation is going to have to be a lot lighter touch! That would include part of Andrew Purcell remuneration too as an example. What could Mannkind bring that down to?
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 23, 2016 17:14:02 GMT -5
Ok I did the math. Last quarter where we have numbers Mannkind drew down $14.7 million as it's share of the losses so the total losses would be about $42 million, giving an increase in the burn rate of $13 million per month minus monthly sales. Obviously any future operation is going to have to be a lot lighter touch! That would include part of Andrew Purcell remuneration too as an example. What could Mannkind bring that down to? It's difficult to say since I don't believe it has ever been publicly broken out. It would make a good question though.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 23, 2016 18:25:39 GMT -5
No, if MNKD is doing any sales/marketing, Afrezza is not going to be cashflow positive. With the loan facility, all Afrezza activities were cash flow neutral for MNKD. Certainly, that cash coming in should be counted as to how long the runway is, but having SNY bail is not extending the runway as MNKD is certainly taking on more cash burn than the 65% of the revenue will cover. Ok I did the math. Last quarter where we have numbers Mannkind drew down $14.7 million as it's share of the losses so the total losses would be about $42 million, giving an increase in the burn rate of $13 million per month minus monthly sales. Obviously any future operation is going to have to be a lot lighter touch! And how much was SNY actually touching anyone such as doctors, light or firmly, vs just heavy touch cost accounting. Which very well could now be part of any discussions of settlement... show me your books SNY.
|
|
|
Post by kc on Feb 23, 2016 23:43:48 GMT -5
Matt did a great job he hit it out of the ballpark. Love the comment about the article in last Sunday's New York Times regarding how insulin pricing keeps going up.
|
|