|
|
Post by mnholdem on Oct 27, 2016 10:10:10 GMT -5
Awareness of Afrezza throughout the USA was abysmal under Sanofi-Aventis. Since MannKind took control of marketing the inhalable insulin in April 2016, multiple sources confirm that internet searches for Afrezza are on the rise.
|
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Oct 27, 2016 10:32:06 GMT -5
Awareness of Afrezza throughout the USA was abysmal under Sanofi-Aventis. Since MannKind took control of marketing the inhalable insulin in April 2016, multiple sources confirm that internet searches for Afrezza are on the rise.
That confirms my "human" and "unscientific" observation that awareness of Afrezza is growing in social media under Mannkind control (compared with Sanofi's control). |
|
|
|
Post by dictatorsaurus on Oct 27, 2016 10:33:57 GMT -5
Looks inversely proportional to the stock price.
|
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Oct 27, 2016 10:45:55 GMT -5
Looks inversely proportional to the stock price. Leave it to this guy to bring negativity to every thread. Ever have any value to add to the discussion? Interesting to point out is how little paid activity there was when Sanofi was in charge of Afrezza. I mean when a new brand launches you would expect Paid traffic to surpass Organic. However in this case paid traffic was nearly non-existent and dropped almost completely a few months before Sanofi bailed. |
|
|
|
Post by pellis on Oct 27, 2016 11:22:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Oct 27, 2016 11:33:58 GMT -5
Awareness of Afrezza throughout the USA was abysmal under Sanofi-Aventis. Since MannKind took control of marketing the inhalable insulin in April 2016, multiple sources confirm that internet searches for Afrezza are on the rise.
That confirms my "human" and "unscientific" observation that awareness of Afrezza is growing in social media under Mannkind control (compared with Sanofi's control). This would seem to be about results of paid online advertising rather than social media. Seems they are paying somewhat less than $2 per click driven to afrezza.com. Not sure whether that is good or bad for pharma. I've done adwords before in my industry and paid more than that per click on average. Some industries that would be sky high, however. Perhaps if I have time I'll try to compare cost per click with Novolog or some of the others. I've not used that site, however. Not sure how authoritative their info is. |
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Oct 27, 2016 11:40:36 GMT -5
mnholdem That confirms my "human" and "unscientific" observation that awareness of Afrezza is growing in social media under Mannkind control (compared with Sanofi's control). This would seem to be about results of paid online advertising rather than social media. Seems they are paying somewhat less than $2 per click driven to afrezza.com. Not sure whether that is good or bad for pharma. I've done adwords before in my industry and paid more than that per click on average. Some industries that would be sky high, however. Perhaps if I have time I'll try to compare cost per click with Novolog or some of the others. I've not used that site, however. Not sure how authoritative their info is. This is incorrect. They are not doing any paid search (PPC). Sanofi did at one point. All of the traffic is currently organic and is a direct result of increasing awareness. you can see the organic vs paid traffic here: www.semrush.com/info/afrezza.com?db=us |
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Oct 27, 2016 12:28:22 GMT -5
Awareness of Afrezza throughout the USA was abysmal under Sanofi-Aventis. Since MannKind took control of marketing the inhalable insulin in April 2016, multiple sources confirm that internet searches for Afrezza are on the rise.
Agreed, they are on the rise. But the second graph shows essentially a straight line trend since July 2015 (Sanofi era). |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Oct 27, 2016 13:46:11 GMT -5
The first graph is Desktop and the second graph is Mobile. I'm hoping that many of the Desktop computer searches are from clinics, but who really knows?  |
|
|
|
Post by orlon on Oct 27, 2016 13:57:54 GMT -5
I have to agree with dictatoraurus....the increase in Internet traffic is absolutely wonderful but meaningless unless it translates to increased scripts and increased share price.
|
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Oct 27, 2016 14:30:34 GMT -5
Good stuff mnholdem. Thanks. now if we could just somehow get some of the posters off this board whose main purpose appears to be to aggravate readers, and others to hurt the stock, this board would be more enjoyable
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Oct 27, 2016 14:45:10 GMT -5
Good stuff mnholdem. Thanks. now if we could just somehow get some of the posters off this board whose main purpose appears to be to aggravate readers, and others to hurt the stock, this board would be more enjoyable I call them pop-tarts:-( |
|
|
|
Post by orlon on Oct 27, 2016 15:14:37 GMT -5
I was not going to respond to brotherm's post but after thinking about it, will. Sir/madam, I assume your intent is to stifle discourse or opinions different from yours. If so please state that you only want people on this board who agree with you and others who think like you do, and do not wish to entertain thoughts that may be different or offer differing viewpoints. I, for one will continue to offer my opinion, and you can read or not read it, as is your right to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Oct 28, 2016 13:32:02 GMT -5
This would seem to be about results of paid online advertising rather than social media. Seems they are paying somewhat less than $2 per click driven to afrezza.com. Not sure whether that is good or bad for pharma. I've done adwords before in my industry and paid more than that per click on average. Some industries that would be sky high, however. Perhaps if I have time I'll try to compare cost per click with Novolog or some of the others. I've not used that site, however. Not sure how authoritative their info is. This is incorrect. They are not doing any paid search (PPC). Sanofi did at one point. All of the traffic is currently organic and is a direct result of increasing awareness. you can see the organic vs paid traffic here: www.semrush.com/info/afrezza.com?db=usInteresting... I go to that link and see the column for "organic search" and in that column they list the "traffic cost" as $24.1K. What does that mean? Maybe "organic" simply means no pesticides were used in the server farm  ... or maybe the "cost" figure really means what it would have cost them to drive that much traffic if they had paid? Just curious... what source do you have that confirms they aren't doing paid search? This would seem to indicate they aren't doing display ads either. That is really inexplicable to me why they wouldn't be doing a combination of paid search and display advertising at this point. It can be quite cost effective. If someone searches for "mealtime insulin" you'd think MNKD would be willing to shell out some money to get "Afrezza Inhaled Insulin" headline in front of them... as well as display adverts on diabetes blogs, etc. Are we really not doing these things now? |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Oct 28, 2016 13:53:33 GMT -5
A screenshot of an Afrezza ad showing up on someone's Scottrade accounts was posted at StockTwits this week, the first proof I've seen that MannKind is paying for some digital advertising of Afrezza.
|
|
... or maybe the "cost" figure really means what it would have cost them to drive that much traffic if they had paid?