|
|
Post by agedhippie on Sept 10, 2016 10:29:46 GMT -5
To the attorney: Seriously? Did you forget the case that Agmen recently won against Sanofi based on a jury trial? And now MannKind has a former VP from Amgen? No attorney taking this on a contigency basis? Man, you screwed up big time because as an attoney you should KNOW you gotta at least a give one valid reason WHY MannKind could NOT win in court, but instead you gave a monetary excuse and the word time. That's easy. Mannkind could not win in court because the contract states that resolution is by arbitration and as governed by the Federal and NY Arbitration Acts it is essentially unbreakable if the arbitration clause is properly drawn (and it is). A client can throw away their money on an unwinnable case if they wish (and often do!) but they cannot compel a lawyer to do the same. |
|
|
|
Post by slugworth008 on Sept 10, 2016 17:03:26 GMT -5
To the attorney: Seriously? Did you forget the case that Agmen recently won against Sanofi based on a jury trial? And now MannKind has a former VP from Amgen? No attorney taking this on a contigency basis? Man, you screwed up big time because as an attoney you should KNOW you gotta at least a give one valid reason WHY MannKind could NOT win in court, but instead you gave a monetary excuse and the word time. That's easy. Mannkind could not win in court because the contract states that resolution is by arbitration and as governed by the Federal and NY Arbitration Acts it is essentially unbreakable if the arbitration clause is properly drawn (and it is). A client can throw away their money on an unwinnable case if they wish (and often do!) but they cannot compel a lawyer to do the same. Then arbitrate away I say !!! After scripts crush SNY's effort that is... |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Sept 12, 2016 7:13:23 GMT -5
As this sales graph illustrates, it seems to me Sanofi pulled the Sales & Marketing of Afrezza on or about October 1, 2015 (refer to NRx). This would indicate that Sanofi was not living up to its contractual responsibility from Oct-2015 to Jan-2016, when they served notice to MannKind of their intent to terminate the Licensing & Collaboration Agreement. Even after having served notice, Sanofi was still contractually responsible for S&M of Afrezza until a date to be specified on a wind-down agreement, the date of which Sanofi would transfer Sales & Marketing rights back to MannKind. That date eventually became April 5, 2016 as I recall.
Therefore, based on the established pattern of sales growth demonstrated before Sanofi pulled the plug, I would think that an arbitration panel would determine that Sanofi's premature exit from its contractual responsibilities resulted in loss of sales of approximately 300-600 scripts per week (the difference between projected growth and actual sales) for a period of 7 months, for which MannKind was entitled to 35%.
While this amounts to only a few $millions, if the arbitration panel becomes convinced that a more robust marketing effort by Sanofi (as opposed to a website and a couple of magazine ads) should have resulted in a significant % increase in Afrezza sales, then the damages associated with the premature withdrawal of our partner may be determined to have been considerably higher.
It will be interesting to learn what the final settlement is between MannKind and Sanofi. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Sept 12, 2016 7:20:28 GMT -5
additionally could it be shown Sanofi never worked with Pharmacy Managers or the appropriate parties for insurance plan coverage?
Was that part of the original contract?
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Sept 12, 2016 7:31:36 GMT -5
additionally could it be shown Sanofi never worked with Pharmacy Managers or the appropriate parties for insurance plan coverage? Was that part of the original contract? Sanofi-Aventis was pretty much responsible for ALL further development of Afrezza, including PBM's & other 3rd party payers, as well as required FDA post-marketing trials. The Agreement gave Sanofi global rights, so they were also responsible for development of ex-U.S. drug approvals. |
|
|
|
Post by kbrion77 on Sept 12, 2016 7:41:55 GMT -5
As this sales graph illustrates, it seems to me Sanofi pulled the Sales & Marketing of Afrezza on or about October 1, 2015 (refer to NRx). This would indicate that Sanofi was not living up to its contractual responsibility from Oct-2015 to Jan-2016, when they served notice to MannKind of their intent to terminate the Licensing & Collaboration Agreement. Even after having served notice, Sanofi was still contractually responsible for S&M of Afrezza until a date to be specified on a wind-down agreement, the date of which Sanofi would transfer Sales & Marketing rights back to MannKind. That date eventually became April 5, 2016 as I recall.
Therefore, based on the establish pattern of sales growth demonstrated before Sanofi pulled the plug, I would think that an arbitration panel would determine that Sanofi's premature exit from its contractual responsibilities resulted in loss of sales of approximately 300-600 scripts per week (the difference between projected growth and actual sales) for a period of 7 months, for which MannKind was entitled to 35%.
While this amounts to only a few $millions, if the arbitration panel becomes convinced that a more robust marketing effort by Sanofi (as opposed to a website and a couple of magazine ads) should have resulted in a significant % increase in Afrezza sales, then the damages associated with the premature withdrawal of our partner may be determined to have been considerably higher.
It will be interesting to learn what the final settlement is between MannKind and Sanofi. I honestly don't think it will matter for us. By the time a possible settlement (and probably slim chance) is determined the company will be sold or folded. I remember an off the cuff comment by Ray saying that their patent portfolio is worth more than their market cap, well it's probably time to put a for sale sign on some of those. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Sept 12, 2016 7:43:31 GMT -5
As this sales graph illustrates, it seems to me Sanofi pulled the Sales & Marketing of Afrezza on or about October 1, 2015 (refer to NRx). This would indicate that Sanofi was not living up to its contractual responsibility from Oct-2015 to Jan-2016, when they served notice to MannKind of their intent to terminate the Licensing & Collaboration Agreement. Even after having served notice, Sanofi was still contractually responsible for S&M of Afrezza until a date to be specified on a wind-down agreement, the date of which Sanofi would transfer Sales & Marketing rights back to MannKind. That date eventually became April 5, 2016 as I recall.
Therefore, based on the establish pattern of sales growth demonstrated before Sanofi pulled the plug, I would think that an arbitration panel would determine that Sanofi's premature exit from its contractual responsibilities resulted in loss of sales of approximately 300-600 scripts per week (the difference between projected growth and actual sales) for a period of 7 months, for which MannKind was entitled to 35%.
While this amounts to only a few $millions, if the arbitration panel becomes convinced that a more robust marketing effort by Sanofi (as opposed to a website and a couple of magazine ads) should have resulted in a significant % increase in Afrezza sales, then the damages associated with the premature withdrawal of our partner may be determined to have been considerably higher.
It will be interesting to learn what the final settlement is between MannKind and Sanofi. Stock Price against scripts over time.
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Sept 12, 2016 7:49:24 GMT -5
So (and this is not Hopium) it comes down to whether the new MannKind CCO can turn it around. I'm still a believer that the marketing material put together by PrecisionEffects - an ad agency that specializes in disruptive drugs/devices - will yield much better results in terms of patient demand, which will translate into scripts.
Sanofi's "Surprise! It's insulin!" effort was weak and, even if it were a better message, the extent of their marketing was to a couple magazines for 2-3 months before their new CEO apparently ordered that the plug be pulled. Based on court testimony, it appears that they did virtually no work with insurers (MannKind hired a VP for that important function) and provided the sales force with little marketing materials to give to doctors. |
|
|
|
Post by dictatorsaurus on Sept 12, 2016 8:20:20 GMT -5
Mannkind is way too small and inexperienced to pull this off at this point.
Any assumptions we make on how a turn around is up ahead is purely based on wishful thinking.
Even if scripts do pick up, which I think they will, the % increase will be need to exceptionally high to offer a promise to shareholders and overall market. And we all know that high spike is not coming. It will be more of a steady marathon race which does not align with the current cash position at all.
Perspective needs to be adjusted based on current facts and past hopes need to be curbed. Best case scenario they put up the for sale sign and hand over the keys to a much larger entity with deep pockets.
Sanofi screwed MNKD. But MNKD management was in full agreement to the terms of the lousy deal. No one held a gun to their heads and told them sign the dotted line and hand out your destiny to someone else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2016 9:00:24 GMT -5
Yeah, I have to agree. MNKD signed on the bottom line. MNKD publically supported SNY till the end saying they were doing a great job, they were doing everything they needed to be doing. As many here pointed out, SNY knows what they are doing much better than we do. And while we can pull out various graphs, SNY could probably pull out some graphs as well particularly the one that's unfolding right now - two months into 2.0 versus sales versus stock price, as an example. As time passes by here though I believe less and less on the SNY screwed MNKD theory and more and more on the fact that the marketplace is hostile to expensive alternatives and doctors won't prescribe what they aren't comfortable with. MNKD needs to boost afrezza sales. Not much else, including a lawsuit, means much until they do.
|
|
|
|
Post by cjm18 on Sept 12, 2016 9:58:20 GMT -5
As this sales graph illustrates, it seems to me Sanofi pulled the Sales & Marketing of Afrezza on or about October 1, 2015 (refer to NRx). This would indicate that Sanofi was not living up to its contractual responsibility from Oct-2015 to Jan-2016, when they served notice to MannKind of their intent to terminate the Licensing & Collaboration Agreement. Even after having served notice, Sanofi was still contractually responsible for S&M of Afrezza until a date to be specified on a wind-down agreement, the date of which Sanofi would transfer Sales & Marketing rights back to MannKind. That date eventually became April 5, 2016 as I recall.
Therefore, based on the establish pattern of sales growth demonstrated before Sanofi pulled the plug, I would think that an arbitration panel would determine that Sanofi's premature exit from its contractual responsibilities resulted in loss of sales of approximately 300-600 scripts per week (the difference between projected growth and actual sales) for a period of 7 months, for which MannKind was entitled to 35%.
While this amounts to only a few $millions, if the arbitration panel becomes convinced that a more robust marketing effort by Sanofi (as opposed to a website and a couple of magazine ads) should have resulted in a significant % increase in Afrezza sales, then the damages associated with the premature withdrawal of our partner may be determined to have been considerably higher.
It will be interesting to learn what the final settlement is between MannKind and Sanofi. I honestly don't think it will matter for us. By the time a possible settlement (and probably slim chance) is determined the company will be sold or folded. I remember an off the cuff comment by Ray saying that their patent portfolio is worth more than their market cap, well it's probably time to put a for sale sign on some of those. What was the market cap when Ray said that? |
|
|
|
Post by b2011wilder on Sept 12, 2016 10:17:54 GMT -5
No offense but I'm tired of hearing about Sanofi in any way, shape, or form. Water under the bridge and all that.
|
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Sept 12, 2016 11:24:25 GMT -5
No offense but I'm tired of hearing about Sanofi in any way, shape, or form. Water under the bridge and all that. Then you are on the wrong thread. All you would need to do to ignore the conversation is to not open up this thread |
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Sept 12, 2016 14:22:26 GMT -5
As this sales graph illustrates, it seems to me Sanofi pulled the Sales & Marketing of Afrezza on or about October 1, 2015 (refer to NRx). This would indicate that Sanofi was not living up to its contractual responsibility from Oct-2015 to Jan-2016, when they served notice to MannKind of their intent to terminate the Licensing & Collaboration Agreement. Even after having served notice, Sanofi was still contractually responsible for S&M of Afrezza until a date to be specified on a wind-down agreement, the date of which Sanofi would transfer Sales & Marketing rights back to MannKind. That date eventually became April 5, 2016 as I recall.
Therefore, based on the establish pattern of sales growth demonstrated before Sanofi pulled the plug, I would think that an arbitration panel would determine that Sanofi's premature exit from its contractual responsibilities resulted in loss of sales of approximately 300-600 scripts per week (the difference between projected growth and actual sales) for a period of 7 months, for which MannKind was entitled to 35%.
While this amounts to only a few $millions, if the arbitration panel becomes convinced that a more robust marketing effort by Sanofi (as opposed to a website and a couple of magazine ads) should have resulted in a significant % increase in Afrezza sales, then the damages associated with the premature withdrawal of our partner may be determined to have been considerably higher.
It will be interesting to learn what the final settlement is between MannKind and Sanofi. I honestly don't think it will matter for us. By the time a possible settlement (and probably slim chance) is determined the company will be sold or folded. I remember an off the cuff comment by Ray saying that their patent portfolio is worth more than their market cap, well it's probably time to put a for sale sign on some of those. kbrion - do you recall what our market cap was when Ray said that? Or do you recall when or where he said that? Thanks in advance. |
|
