|
Post by op2778 on Aug 9, 2016 12:01:46 GMT -5
Wow people,
I read all the above and with all due respect, you all looks naif at best. I'm agree with Cassidy, nothing is clear with MNKD (note: I'm long and deep underwater).
Do you ppl really forget that we aren't a charity organization? People, we are a quoted company in a rigged market called Wall Street.
Do you really think Wall Street doesn't know the numbers? Come on guys, be serious for God sake.
It's ok to be long, but we are starting to look ridicolous in this board.
Op
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Aug 9, 2016 12:12:16 GMT -5
Wow people, I read all the above and with all due respect, you all looks naif at best. I'm agree with Cassidy, nothing is clear with MNKD (note: I'm long and deep underwater). Do you ppl really forget that we aren't a charity organization? People, we are a quoted company in a rigged market called Wall Street. Do you really think Wall Street doesn't know the numbers? Come on guys, be serious for God sake. It's ok to be long, but we are starting to look ridicolous in this board. Op Get with the program and drink more of the koolaid, or go home shortie. As an aside, is it just me or does he sort of look related to the OUTsulin character?
|
|
|
Post by mydogskip on Aug 9, 2016 12:19:24 GMT -5
Wow people, I read all the above and with all due respect, you all looks naif at best. I'm agree with Cassidy, nothing is clear with MNKD (note: I'm long and deep underwater). Do you ppl really forget that we aren't a charity organization? People, we are a quoted company in a rigged market called Wall Street. Do you really think Wall Street doesn't know the numbers? Come on guys, be serious for God sake. It's ok to be long, but we are starting to look ridicolous in this board. Op You just hit the bulls eye. You don't have to read this board long enough to know many are living in a fantasy land in regards to Mannkind. Sure, there always has been plenty of potential but not much has materialized for shareholders in the last 15 or so years. Message boards typically foster the fantasy scenario that rarely come to life, especially for biotechs. It also brings together some of the most thin skinned people you will ever meet. Present them with a cold hard fact and they freak out. And what is most hilarious that most of these people are probably very level headed in other regards to their life but when it comes to their investment in Mannkind, their emotions run rough shod over any sense of rational thought. They aren't bad people. They are just misguided with the hard truth that this company is on the brink of bankruptcy if it can not find a way to get people to use their drug and quickly. Time is running out quickly.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 9, 2016 12:21:27 GMT -5
"The CC and PR didn't help me ascertain what I'm looking for. Ultimately, all I care about are three things:
1) How much it costs to make. No company will publish this information.
2) How much it costs to market and distribute. No company will publish this information.
3) How much they're going to sell it for." No company will publish the various discounts they negotiate with 3rd party payers.
---
The entire premise of this thread - to suggest that this company is somehow negligent in not publishing the answers to these questions - is what's ridiculous, IMO. I sometimes wonder why people even bother to answer these kind of posts.
I suppose it's because we have so many good-hearted people on this board, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 9, 2016 14:32:20 GMT -5
It is essentially impossible to get detailed activity based cost accounting detail from GAAP financial data, and even if you try the numbers are not comparable quarter to quarter. For example, a big part of manufacturing cost is absorption of fixed overhead costs (like depreciation, quality inspectors, maintenance). Fixed costs are even more relevant at low production volume because the same costs are spread over fewer units.
This time last year, Afrezza was being made for Sanofi in small batches at a fully burdened cost. In Q4 the auditors force the company to take some big write-downs, and a lot of that related to manufacturing capacity. So a machine that was being depreciated from an original cost basis of $100 this time last year, may now be depreciated from a written down value of $30. A unit of Afrezza made this year will get a lower overhead allocation than one made last year before the write down, all because of a magic accounting entry. Would it help to know the unit cost in either year if they are not comparable, and does it matter to cash flow what the raw material inventory and buildings originally cost? The answer is no; those are sunk costs and the money is not coming back. What you want to know is the variable incremental unit cost, and that is not knowable for an outsider and it is almost unknowable for those working at the company.
The only easy number on your list is distribution cost; all the big pharmaceutical wholesalers operate on margins less than 1% of sales and on average they make about 0.5%. On a script that Symphony reports as a $500 sale, the cost to move the box from point A to point B is about $2.50.
Everything else would be a wildly inaccurate guess.
|
|
|
Post by tripoley on Aug 9, 2016 15:40:21 GMT -5
The CC and PR didn't help me ascertain what I'm looking for. Ultimately, all I care about are three things: 1) How much it costs to make. 2) How much it costs to market and distribute. 3) How much they're going to sell it for. Nothing from the CC and PR addressed those issues. A no doubt inadequate attempt at guesstimating on my part is to start with the the first quarter 10-Q and symphony data provided here and try to assemble my own estimates: 1) product manufacturing cost = 7,532,000 2) zero since they hadn't started marketing or distributing during the first quarter 3) per symphony, first quarter "cumulative sales" estimate = 2,864,000 Now symphony lists the "weekly avg cost/script" as $500. However, it's generally agreed that most places seem to charge around $300 per script, so I suppose symphony's sales estimate is high and should be closer to 1.8 million. Right off, there's an apparent loss of 5-6 million dollars. That's a large gap even without marketing and distribution costs are added. How do they intend to reach a point where there is a profit on each sale and when do they anticipate reaching it? Product manufacturing cost is meaningless. How much went into samples and how much sits on shelves unsold?
|
|
|
Post by dcassidy1618a on Aug 9, 2016 21:38:11 GMT -5
"The CC and PR didn't help me ascertain what I'm looking for. Ultimately, all I care about are three things:
1) How much it costs to make. No company will publish this information.
2) How much it costs to market and distribute. No company will publish this information.
3) How much they're going to sell it for." No company will publish the various discounts they negotiate with 3rd party payers.
---
The entire premise of this thread - to suggest that this company is somehow negligent in not publishing the answers to these questions - is what's ridiculous, IMO. I sometimes wonder why people even bother to answer these kind of posts.
I suppose it's because we have so many good-hearted people on this board, I suppose.
I understand that no company will directly publish these things. However, most companies do try and offer future estimates of various relevant numbers -- expenses, revenue, etc -- something that an investor can work with for appraisal purposes. Moreover, I can usually glean from quarterly reports at least some information about these topics. For example, at the end of the first quarter, there was no afrezza inventory even though they reported $7,532,000 in product manufacturing costs. So what did they spend that money on if it wasn't to build inventory? On the latest 10-Q, there is now $2,866,000 worth of inventory which I presume is being valued at the cost of manufacture -- at least that's what the 10-Q suggests. Since there were no sales, I presume the $3,704,000 product manufacturing costs went to build that inventory. Therefore, have to presume that the 7.5 plus 3.7 equals 11.2 was spent to build that inventory for the first six months. While other costs are involve in product manufacturing, that is still a large gap between what they report as manufacturing cost and what they report as "cost" for inventory reporting. MNKD appears to blame the difference it on "under-absorbed labor and overhead." That may be viable, but I don't understand it and no clear explanation is offered in the 10-Q. Also, since I don't know is how many doses that will supply or how much they are charging per script, I have no way of translating available info into potential future revenues and/or estimating potential profit margin. However, I can track inventory changes versus revenues to get some estimate of how much inventory is being converted to revenues and compare THAT to manufacturing costs. But I'll need to wait at least another quarter to get that data. My original objective was simply to get an early handle on what product manufacturing costs would be as future as sales rose. As it stands, there were $4,310,000 research and development costs and $11,110,000 selling, general and administrative costs. Since the latter are bound to increase with marketing and distribution, and since product manufacturing costs are also bound to rise, I'm just having a difficult time seeing when the breakeven point might arrive based upon the numbers I used from symphony data and old 10-Qs. 2,866
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Aug 9, 2016 21:54:07 GMT -5
"The CC and PR didn't help me ascertain what I'm looking for. Ultimately, all I care about are three things:
1) How much it costs to make. No company will publish this information.
2) How much it costs to market and distribute. No company will publish this information.
3) How much they're going to sell it for." No company will publish the various discounts they negotiate with 3rd party payers.
---
The entire premise of this thread - to suggest that this company is somehow negligent in not publishing the answers to these questions - is what's ridiculous, IMO. I sometimes wonder why people even bother to answer these kind of posts.
I suppose it's because we have so many good-hearted people on this board, I suppose.
I understand that no company will directly publish these things. However, most companies do try and offer future estimates of various relevant numbers -- expenses, revenue, etc -- something that an investor can work with for appraisal purposes. Moreover, I can usually glean from quarterly reports at least some information about these topics. For example, at the end of the first quarter, there was no afrezza inventory even though they reported $7,532,000 in product manufacturing costs. So what did they spend that money on if it wasn't to build inventory? On the latest 10-Q, there is now $2,866,000 worth of inventory which I presume is being valued at the cost of manufacture -- at least that's what the 10-Q suggests. Since there were no sales, I presume the $3,704,000 product manufacturing costs went to build that inventory. Therefore, have to presume that the 7.5 plus 3.7 equals 11.2 was spent to build that inventory for the first six months. While other costs are involve in product manufacturing, that is still a large gap between what they report as manufacturing cost and what they report as "cost" for inventory reporting. I don't understand that. Also, since I don't know is how many doses that will supply or how much they are charging per script, I have no way of translating available info into potential future revenues and/or estimating potential profit margin. However, I can track inventory changes versus revenues to get some estimate of how much inventory is being converted to revenues and compare THAT to manufacturing costs. But I'll need to wait at least another quarter to get that data. My original objective was to get a handle on what product manufacturing costs would be as future as sales rose. As it stands, there were $4,310,000 research and development costs and $11,110,000 selling, general and administrative costs. Since the latter are bound to increase with marketing and distribution, and since product manufacturing costs are also bound to rise, I'm just having a difficult time seeing when the breakeven point might arrive based upon the numbers I used from symphony data and old 10-Qs. 2,866 good work, thank you
|
|
|
Post by anderson on Aug 9, 2016 23:23:11 GMT -5
"On the latest 10-Q, there is now $2,866,000 worth of inventory which I presume is being valued at the cost of manufacture -- at least that's what the 10-Q suggests"
Actually on page 8 of that 10-Q what Inventories is is explicitly stated:
2. Inventories
Inventories consist of the following (in thousands): June 30,2016 Raw materials $1,491 Work-in-process 1,155 Finished goods 220
Total Inventory $2,866
|
|
|
Post by anderson on Aug 9, 2016 23:27:31 GMT -5
Pg 20.
PRODUCT MANUFACTURING EXPENSES
Product manufacturing expenses represent under-absorbed labor and overhead, foreign currency exchange impact, and inventory write-offs, which are expensed in the period in which they are incurred rather than as a portion of the inventory cost.
$3,704 (in thousands)
|
|
|
Post by dcassidy1618a on Aug 10, 2016 11:35:03 GMT -5
"On the latest 10-Q, there is now $2,866,000 worth of inventory which I presume is being valued at the cost of manufacture -- at least that's what the 10-Q suggests" Actually on page 8 of that 10-Q what Inventories is is explicitly stated: 2. Inventories Inventories consist of the following (in thousands): June 30,2016 Raw materials $1,491 Work-in-process 1,155 Finished goods 220 Total Inventory $2,866 Thanks. I hadn't gotten that far, but that brings up another question -- how do they account for their insulin inventory? Is insulin the raw material or does that refer to the FKDP or to both? I recall that the Amphastar deal requires them to buy 20-30 million dollars worth of insulin a year, but where does that go on the 10-Q? Is the Pfizer material accounted for anywhere? I keep thinking there should be around 20-30 million dollars worth of insulin stored somewhere -- "approximately €120.1 million, of which €98.5 million is remaining at December 31, 2015. We have contracted for the purchase of €28.8 million in 2016." I presume they haven't used it all so it should show on the 10-Q but I can't find it.
|
|
|
Post by dcassidy1618a on Aug 10, 2016 11:56:20 GMT -5
Something else I was interested in that I'll ask here:
"We have a three-year supply agreement with the contract manufacturer that produces our inhaler and the corresponding cartridges. We expect to be able to qualify an additional vendor of plastic-molding contract manufacturing services, if warranted by demand.
We also have a three-year agreement with the contractor that performs the final packaging of AFREZZA overwraps, inhalers and printed material into patient kits. We expect to be able to qualify an additional vendor of packaging services, if warranted by demand."
Does that mean that all they do in Danbury is the production of the FDKP/insulin particles?
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Aug 10, 2016 12:27:13 GMT -5
Something else I was interested in that I'll ask here: "We have a three-year supply agreement with the contract manufacturer that produces our inhaler and the corresponding cartridges. We expect to be able to qualify an additional vendor of plastic-molding contract manufacturing services, if warranted by demand. We also have a three-year agreement with the contractor that performs the final packaging of AFREZZA overwraps, inhalers and printed material into patient kits. We expect to be able to qualify an additional vendor of packaging services, if warranted by demand." Does that mean that all they do in Danbury is the production of the FDKP/insulin particles? the cartridges are filled with "afrezza" and sealed at Danbury. some people here toured the line.
|
|