|
|
Post by BlueCat on Oct 8, 2016 19:49:43 GMT -5
Seems to me the investor profile is not just when you buy, its when you sell. And the return between the two.
So it would be good to see the charts on when he's advised selling on stocks, too, and how that turned out.
Nate's clear that he's not a trader.
In any case, I was already in when I discovered Nate and find the commentary comforting as I hold through this. At least, like many on this board, I'm not the only nut ; )
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Oct 8, 2016 20:38:28 GMT -5
Yes, I'll look forward to the day Nate says MNKD is over valued:-)
|
|
|
|
Post by minnlearner on Oct 8, 2016 21:22:16 GMT -5
Q2U- if you are nuts then there are at least 2 of us!
|
|
|
|
Post by wgreystone on Oct 9, 2016 12:28:34 GMT -5
Mannkind was an obvious winner due to supriority of Afrezza. Unfortunately, the company was ruinned by over-pride management team. It refused to raise money while the stock price was $10 (while most small bio/pharma companies were doing that). It refuses to low Afrezza price when it's obvious that insurance companies won't put Afrezza on tier 1/2 and remove prior-auth unless MNKD does something.
Mannkind management team needs to get into the paranoid mode now.
|
|
|
|
Post by slugworth008 on Oct 9, 2016 12:43:57 GMT -5
Mannkind was an obvious winner due to supriority of Afrezza. Unfortunately, the company was ruinned by over-pride management team. It refused to raise money while the stock price was $10 (while most small bio/pharma companies were doing that). It refuses to low Afrezza price when it's obvious that insurance companies won't put Afrezza on tier 1/2 and remove prior-auth unless MNKD does something. Mannkind management team needs to get into the paranoid mode now. And it would appear that you've refused to do any real research on MNKD nor do you know the history of the CO - Like many of us longtime longs have and know. So I'll briefly enlighten you. At 10 a share and a partnership with SNY - MNKD entered into what should have been a lucrative partnership agreement...Then Vienbacher, who signed off on the deal, was sacked by SNY and his replacement - Oliver Brandicourt - Had no taste for Afrezza....What has been done since by Matt and Mike is nothing short of remarkable IMO. That is the seriously abbreviated version - If you want to know more spend some time reading older threads on this board. |
|
|
|
Post by cjm18 on Oct 9, 2016 13:32:14 GMT -5
Mannkind was an obvious winner due to supriority of Afrezza. Unfortunately, the company was ruinned by over-pride management team. It refused to raise money while the stock price was $10 (while most small bio/pharma companies were doing that). It refuses to low Afrezza price when it's obvious that insurance companies won't put Afrezza on tier 1/2 and remove prior-auth unless MNKD does something. Mannkind management team needs to get into the paranoid mode now. Afrezza is already significantly cheaper than other rapid acting analogs due to those drugs raising their prices multiple times. |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Oct 9, 2016 14:21:40 GMT -5
Mannkind was an obvious winner due to supriority of Afrezza. Unfortunately, the company was ruinned by over-pride management team. It refused to raise money while the stock price was $10 (while most small bio/pharma companies were doing that). It refuses to low Afrezza price when it's obvious that insurance companies won't put Afrezza on tier 1/2 and remove prior-auth unless MNKD does something. Mannkind management team needs to get into the paranoid mode now. Afrezza is already significantly cheaper than other rapid acting analogs due to those drugs raising their prices multiple times. It appears that the GoodRx Fair Price report confirms that Rapid-Acting Analog prandial insulin prices (as well as market-dominant basal insulin brands) are now the drugs that carry a premium price tag:  |
|
|
|
Post by centralcoastinvestor on Oct 9, 2016 14:44:45 GMT -5
Afrezza is already significantly cheaper than other rapid acting analogs due to those drugs raising their prices multiple times. It appears that the GoodRx Fair Price report confirms that Rapid-Acting Analog prandial insulin prices (as well as market-dominant basal insulin brands) are now the drugs that carry a premium price tag: It is so ironic that one of the complaints about Afrezza was that it was overpriced. While MannKind struggles to gain insurance coverage and doctor acceptance, Afrezza becomes the cheapest rapid acting insulin. It fact Afrezza is far superior to any rapid acting insulin. I still believe the tide will turn for Afrezza. |
|
|
|
Post by sophie on Oct 9, 2016 14:56:28 GMT -5
Any idea if this accounts for Afrezza's higher units/dose needed for therapeutic effect? I know that vials contain 1000 units, but depending on which box of Afrezza one buys, the unit count varies. Each individual also responds differently to Afrezza from what I've gathered from testimonials. It seems they've accounted for this somehow, since one vial of humalog/novolog does not cost >$450, so I'm wondering if they've simply averaged the normal cost per prescription. This would seem to be unreliable (either high or low) since titration packs aren't needed for injected insulin. Most Rx's have been new, which could mean that we're either seeing a greater number of patients trying Afrezza, or it's taking awhile to dial the patients in on the correct dosage. With the low refill count, I would suspect this is what's happening. However, being >$100 cheaper than competitors, even if the numbers are skewed slightly downward, it looks like it will still be cheaper, even after patients get dialed in.
|
|
|
|
Post by derek2 on Oct 9, 2016 15:28:04 GMT -5
Any idea if this accounts for Afrezza's higher units/dose needed for therapeutic effect? I know that vials contain 1000 units, but depending on which box of Afrezza one buys, the unit count varies. Each individual also responds differently to Afrezza from what I've gathered from testimonials. It seems they've accounted for this somehow, since one vial of humalog/novolog does not cost >$450, so I'm wondering if they've simply averaged the normal cost per prescription. This would seem to be unreliable (either high or low) since titration packs aren't needed for injected insulin. Most Rx's have been new, which could mean that we're either seeing a greater number of patients trying Afrezza, or it's taking awhile to dial the patients in on the correct dosage. With the low refill count, I would suspect this is what's happening. However, being >$100 cheaper than competitors, even if the numbers are skewed slightly downward, it looks like it will still be cheaper, even after patients get dialed in. There's that, but injected insulin has either the cost of tips + "air shot" wastage for injector pens or the cost for syringes for vial-based. I posted a head-to-head here a while back showing that Afrezza and modern prandial RAAs are about equal in cost. It shocked me - I thought Afrezza would be far more expensive. "GoodRx lists (30 (4 unit) and 60 (8 unit) cartridges) of Afrezza 4 units and 8 units) cheapest at Kroger = $272 for 600 Units, equivalent to 600 IU as per dosing instructions. GoodRx lists Novolog at Kroger (not the cheapest option, but I want to compare apples to apples) at $491 for 5 * 3ml pens = 1500 units. Now, remove 50 units from each pen for air shots (wastage) = 1250 IU for $491. add on 3 boxes of tips for $50 = $541 for 1250 units usable Novolog: $541 for 1500 units (1250 usable) = $.43 per unit Afrezza: $272 for 600 units = $.45 per unit I could have priced out the Novolog for $373 at price club and 300 tips for $30 for off-brand, but I wanted to make the comparison fair, sourcing from the same pharmacy." |
|
|
|
Post by figglebird on Oct 9, 2016 16:48:44 GMT -5
1. The absurd markup or artificial Cost of manufacturing insulin is one of two related historical variables that will at some point adjust in (ongoing)gradual unison. The insane Mark up is at its essence just the byproduct of a long time losing effort against diseases like diabetes. This longtime losing effort over generations burnishes a mentality that becomes engrained in the mindsets of those in the medical community on the front lines fighting this losing battle which proves even more tricky because they are by nature unable to articulate or understand the possibility of real improvement. They are ill equipped to fight this fight but younger generations will come to understand sooner than later This is the near term issue that must be waited out, and in no way can be measured thru meaningkess increases or decreases in weekly rxs. The system(like many) has been broken for so long the medical community literally lacks the vocabulary to fairly or accurately describe the real problem - but they can emphasize certain data points - in this case express scripts and CVs seem to be the ones spurring the onset of change - ultimately once insulin manufacturing cmbegins to retract toward the semblance of fair market, advanced tweaked or nuanced based treatments like afrezza will take hold in its adaptive ability to specialize and diversify around the individual end user, in turn sparking an adherence revolution. We are not there yet. Ironically one of the few non-intrinsic or intellectual hedges mnkd has in place is directly linked to this long-standing cost structure/losing mentality issue, via the insulin put currently being excerized w sanofi. This was as I see it one of many meaningful bread crumbs mr Mann left his backers - though its not a to his foundation it does provide a window into his thinking.
2. His thinking imo is based on something Even more pivotal - the eventual destabilizing impact that efficient inhalable platforms like ts poses to the medical community - evolution is a near constant that happens every second behind the scenes much to our ignorance - it cannot be controlled nor imposed but reinvention on a global level is always underway - ts at its essence poses a meaningful query as to how to combat disease across all arenas(not just diabetes)-some forward thinking posters have alluded how a platform like ts poses a new and unknown ability to redesign basis and approach previously unimaginable.
These are big ideas - titration is just an inkling.
There is no way this happens tomorrow - so why, with the cash position being where it is should we have faith?
Al Mann has left a trail into his thinking that I believe suggests that he will ensure retention and control over his ip at any cost.
I look to the past - others have as well and well and at some point the question as to why and how much insulin has gone up in Po rice will have to be addressed.
|
|
|
|
Post by sophie on Oct 9, 2016 18:33:31 GMT -5
Novolog: $541 for 1500 units (1250 usable) = $.43 per unit Afrezza: $272 for 600 units = $.45 per unit I could have priced out the Novolog for $373 at price club and 300 tips for $30 for off-brand, but I wanted to make the comparison fair, sourcing from the same pharmacy." Wouldn't this mean that Afrezza is quite a bit more expensive considering that it takes 2-3 more units/dose (from what I've read) than injected? I'm not understanding the graphic that got posted... Fuzzy math. A different graphic from last year. Towards the bottom it says that 4 units translates laterally, 6 goes to 8 with Afrezza and 9 goes to 12. secure.medicalletter.org/w1463c |
|
|
|
Post by derek2 on Oct 9, 2016 19:59:23 GMT -5
Novolog: $541 for 1500 units (1250 usable) = $.43 per unit Afrezza: $272 for 600 units = $.45 per unit I could have priced out the Novolog for $373 at price club and 300 tips for $30 for off-brand, but I wanted to make the comparison fair, sourcing from the same pharmacy." Wouldn't this mean that Afrezza is quite a bit more expensive considering that it takes 2-3 more units/dose (from what I've read) than injected? I'm not understanding the graphic that got posted... Fuzzy math. A different graphic from last year. Towards the bottom it says that 4 units translates laterally, 6 goes to 8 with Afrezza and 9 goes to 12. secure.medicalletter.org/w1463cLooks similar to me - from the dosing guide as approved by the FDA and MNKD, unless you don't believe them.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2016 23:28:12 GMT -5
Mannkind was an obvious winner due to supriority of Afrezza. Unfortunately, the company was ruinned by over-pride management team. It refused to raise money while the stock price was $10 (while most small bio/pharma companies were doing that). It refuses to low Afrezza price when it's obvious that insurance companies won't put Afrezza on tier 1/2 and remove prior-auth unless MNKD does something. Mannkind management team needs to get into the paranoid mode now. And it would appear that you've refused to do any real research on MNKD nor do you know the history of the CO - Like many of us longtime longs have and know. So I'll briefly enlighten you. At 10 a share and a partnership with SNY - MNKD entered into what should have been a lucrative partnership agreement...Then Vienbacher, who signed off on the deal, was sacked by SNY and his replacement - Oliver Brandicourt - Had no taste for Afrezza....What has been done since by Matt and Mike is nothing short of remarkable IMO. That is the seriously abbreviated version - If you want to know more spend some time reading older threads on this board. The company was overvalued at that point. It was worth 4 billion and had no sales. That was the reason for the start of a short position. The CEO change just took it to another level. It was a hard lesson in learning ho to value a company |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 0:16:22 GMT -5
Wouldn't this mean that Afrezza is quite a bit more expensive considering that it takes 2-3 more units/dose (from what I've read) than injected? I'm not understanding the graphic that got posted... Fuzzy math. A different graphic from last year. Towards the bottom it says that 4 units translates laterally, 6 goes to 8 with Afrezza and 9 goes to 12. secure.medicalletter.org/w1463cLooks similar to me - from the dosing guide as approved by the FDA and MNKD, unless you don't believe them. The point is .. for Injections , a user can take 5 units , but Afrezza he has to dose 8 unit cartridge and that changes the cost when calculating per unit. So to keep it simple but an extreme case, a user taking 5 units - 3 times a day 1250 units translates to 83 days of insulin ( using your post for $ - Novolog: $541 for 1500 units (1250 usable) = $.43 per unit ) in case of afrezza that would be ...this gets a bit tricky to compare on the same scale. Assuming a pack of 90 catridge 8 unit costs - $270 ( keeping price close to 4/8 unit combo pack and rounding off) - 720 units cost 270 - $.375 per unit 1992 units - 8units * 3 per day * 88 days costs = 1992*.375 = Afrezza - $747So to keep it simple and an equivalent case, a user taking 4 units - 3 times a day 1250 units translates to 104 days of insulin ( using your post for $ - Novolog: $541 for 1500 units (1250 usable) = $.43 per unit ) in case of afrezza that would be .. user would need 3.46 boxes of 4 unit 90 pack cartridge and to match novolog price of $541 - each box should be priced --> $156. |
|
