|
Post by jonny80s on Jun 12, 2017 9:25:50 GMT -5
I'm all in with Damon Dash. This product will revolutionize diabetes management as we know it. Did you Google Damon Dash..... not so popular these days.... and broke.
|
|
|
Video ASM
Jun 12, 2017 9:37:02 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by saxcmann on Jun 12, 2017 9:37:02 GMT -5
I'm all in with Damon Dash. This product will revolutionize diabetes management as we know it. Did you Google Damon Dash..... not so popular these days.... and broke. Just googled, negative 2 million. Wow.
|
|
|
Post by bradleysbest on Jun 12, 2017 9:41:47 GMT -5
Jeez sounds like he needs Afrezza to succeed more than I do!
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Jun 12, 2017 11:27:16 GMT -5
Jeez sounds like he needs Afrezza to succeed more than I do! Lol, I googled myself a few months back. It said I made $90,000 personal training out of my home. ( LeAnne's Fitness) None of it was true! Only the name of my business. It also told me I lived places I've never even heard of:-)
|
|
|
Post by bradleysbest on Jun 12, 2017 14:33:36 GMT -5
Sports we all know you make at least double that! 😜
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Jun 12, 2017 14:37:42 GMT -5
Did you Google Damon Dash..... not so popular these days.... and broke. Just googled, negative 2 million. Wow. He has had some rough times as we all do. However, now he's on Afrezza, the life changer.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Jun 12, 2017 15:42:42 GMT -5
Sports we all know you make at least double that! 😜 Shhhhhh...cash payments don't count, right?
|
|
|
Post by factspls88 on Jun 12, 2017 15:55:13 GMT -5
Does anyone know how many reps Sanofi had detailing Afrezza vs. the number of reps employed by Mannkind? If we knew it I don't recall. It would be interesting to see how many scripts have been generated per rep under Sanofi vs. under Mannkind, especially since it's likely, imo, that Mannkind had far fewer reps. Mike already alluded to cartridges per script trending higher. Based on Mike's comments, we can assume it was about 4-5 hundred. Assuming Sanofi had 400 reps detailing Afrezza, whereas Mannkind has approx. 85 reps detailing Afrezza (per compound26), then:- At it's new script peak (per Symphony) on 9/25/15, Sanofi's 400 reps sold 394 new scripts or roughly 1 new script per rep, per week. - At that rate per week, Mannkind's salesforce would need to sell 86 new scripts per week to equal Sanofi's best week. - Since Mannkind actually sold 121 new scripts the most recent week ending 6/2 (not it's high), it's 85 person sales force sold 1.4 scripts per week, a 40% greater rate than Sanofi's best. - If Mannkind had Sanofi's 400 reps, it would currently be selling 560 new scripts per week (400 Sanofi equivalent reps x 1.4 scripts per week). Bottom line - assuming the above rep numbers are close to being correct, then Mannkind is doing a significantly better job at selling Afrezza than Sanofi at it's peak. - This still doesn't justify the number of new scripts per, but it does show that Mannkind's marketing to date is having some positive effect, and that more reps and more advertising should generate even greater sales (duh!). Feel free to poke holes in any or all of this. Clearly the analysis rests on the assumed number of reps at each company and particularly those at Sanofi.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jun 12, 2017 16:03:40 GMT -5
Based on Mike's comments, we can assume it was about 4-5 hundred. Assuming Sanofi had 400 reps detailing Afrezza, whereas Mannkind has approx. 85 reps detailing Afrezza (per compound26), then:- At it's new script peak (per Symphony) on 9/25/15, Sanofi's 400 reps sold 394 new scripts or roughly 1 new script per rep, per week. - At that rate per week, Mannkind's salesforce would need to sell 86 new scripts per week to equal Sanofi's best week. - Since Mannkind actually sold 121 new scripts the most recent week ending 6/2 (not it's high), it's 85 person sales force sold 1.4 scripts per week, a 40% greater rate than Sanofi's best. - If Mannkind had Sanofi's 400 reps, it would currently be selling 560 new scripts per week (400 Sanofi equivalent reps x 1.4 scripts per week). Bottom line - assuming the above rep numbers are close to being correct, then Mannkind is doing a significantly better job at selling Afrezza than Sanofi at it's peak. - This still doesn't justify the number of new scripts per, but it does show that Mannkind's marketing to date is having some positive effect, and that more reps and more advertising should generate even greater sales (duh!). Feel free to poke holes in any or all of this. Clearly the analysis rests on the assumed number of reps at each company and particularly those at Sanofi. If I recall correctly, in the fourth quarter CC, Mike basically said that Mannkind was basically using 1/10 sales people (vs Sanofi) to generate a 75% of the sale volume (in terms of units shipped, vs that of Sanofi) for the 4th quarter of 2016 (compared with 4th quarter of 2015).
|
|
|
Video ASM
Jun 13, 2017 0:43:41 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by straightly on Jun 13, 2017 0:43:41 GMT -5
Assuming Sanofi had 400 reps detailing Afrezza, whereas Mannkind has approx. 85 reps detailing Afrezza (per compound26), then:- At it's new script peak (per Symphony) on 9/25/15, Sanofi's 400 reps sold 394 new scripts or roughly 1 new script per rep, per week. - At that rate per week, Mannkind's salesforce would need to sell 86 new scripts per week to equal Sanofi's best week. - Since Mannkind actually sold 121 new scripts the most recent week ending 6/2 (not it's high), it's 85 person sales force sold 1.4 scripts per week, a 40% greater rate than Sanofi's best. - If Mannkind had Sanofi's 400 reps, it would currently be selling 560 new scripts per week (400 Sanofi equivalent reps x 1.4 scripts per week). Bottom line - assuming the above rep numbers are close to being correct, then Mannkind is doing a significantly better job at selling Afrezza than Sanofi at it's peak. - This still doesn't justify the number of new scripts per, but it does show that Mannkind's marketing to date is having some positive effect, and that more reps and more advertising should generate even greater sales (duh!). Feel free to poke holes in any or all of this. Clearly the analysis rests on the assumed number of reps at each company and particularly those at Sanofi. If I recall correctly, in the fourth quarter CC, Mike basically said that Mannkind was basically using 1/10 sales people (vs Sanofi) to generate a 75% of the sale volume (in terms of units shipped, vs that of Sanofi) for the 4th quarter of 2016 (compared with 4th quarter of 2015). What I don't get is this: If a patient is staying on, our refill numbers should be accelerating. They are not. If a provider started prescribing and keep on it, our new rx number should accelerating. Assuming we have 85 sales, we are saying that each sale person is keeping 2 doctors, with each writing one new and one refill prescriptions. How can this add up? Somebody please help Mike!
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Jun 13, 2017 0:53:56 GMT -5
Straightly, what you point out is something that was apparent the first time around with SNY; but it was kept in the basement, with multiple padlocks - no one wants to go there.
We need the foreign stuff, the US stuff is dog do do. It will not change for either a really long time or much faster with a lot of big-time advertising or a couple of big names getting on board, like an Oprah.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 13, 2017 1:02:01 GMT -5
Based on Mike's comments, we can assume it was about 4-5 hundred. Assuming Sanofi had 400 reps detailing Afrezza, whereas Mannkind has approx. 85 reps detailing Afrezza (per compound26), then:- At it's new script peak (per Symphony) on 9/25/15, Sanofi's 400 reps sold 394 new scripts or roughly 1 new script per rep, per week. - At that rate per week, Mannkind's salesforce would need to sell 86 new scripts per week to equal Sanofi's best week. - Since Mannkind actually sold 121 new scripts the most recent week ending 6/2 (not it's high), it's 85 person sales force sold 1.4 scripts per week, a 40% greater rate than Sanofi's best. - If Mannkind had Sanofi's 400 reps, it would currently be selling 560 new scripts per week (400 Sanofi equivalent reps x 1.4 scripts per week). Bottom line - assuming the above rep numbers are close to being correct, then Mannkind is doing a significantly better job at selling Afrezza than Sanofi at it's peak. - This still doesn't justify the number of new scripts per, but it does show that Mannkind's marketing to date is having some positive effect, and that more reps and more advertising should generate even greater sales (duh!). Feel free to poke holes in any or all of this. Clearly the analysis rests on the assumed number of reps at each company and particularly those at Sanofi. In previous discussions of the effectiveness of the different sales forces, IIRC, some have pointed out that the Sanofi sales people were (probably) representing a number of different Sanofi drugs and only devoting a portion of their time and doctor visits to Afrezza. So maybe only, say, 25% of their time / effort was tied to Afrezza. In which case 400 Sanofi reps should really be considered as 100. Whereas Mannkind sales people are 100% about Afrezza.
|
|
|
Post by factspls88 on Jun 13, 2017 8:08:13 GMT -5
Assuming Sanofi had 400 reps detailing Afrezza, whereas Mannkind has approx. 85 reps detailing Afrezza (per compound26), then:- At it's new script peak (per Symphony) on 9/25/15, Sanofi's 400 reps sold 394 new scripts or roughly 1 new script per rep, per week. - At that rate per week, Mannkind's salesforce would need to sell 86 new scripts per week to equal Sanofi's best week. - Since Mannkind actually sold 121 new scripts the most recent week ending 6/2 (not it's high), it's 85 person sales force sold 1.4 scripts per week, a 40% greater rate than Sanofi's best. - If Mannkind had Sanofi's 400 reps, it would currently be selling 560 new scripts per week (400 Sanofi equivalent reps x 1.4 scripts per week). Bottom line - assuming the above rep numbers are close to being correct, then Mannkind is doing a significantly better job at selling Afrezza than Sanofi at it's peak. - This still doesn't justify the number of new scripts per, but it does show that Mannkind's marketing to date is having some positive effect, and that more reps and more advertising should generate even greater sales (duh!). Feel free to poke holes in any or all of this. Clearly the analysis rests on the assumed number of reps at each company and particularly those at Sanofi. In previous discussions of the effectiveness of the different sales forces, IIRC, some have pointed out that the Sanofi sales people were (probably) representing a number of different Sanofi drugs and only devoting a portion of their time and doctor visits to Afrezza. So maybe only, say, 25% of their time / effort was tied to Afrezza. In which case 400 Sanofi reps should really be considered as 100. Whereas Mannkind sales people are 100% about Afrezza. Fair point which I also considered. I could counter that Sanofi's reps had better access to physicians that Afrezza reps. Regardless, I think that right now Afrezza is better off right now than being under the aegis of Sanofi. That is not to say that another pharma partner wouldn't be better for Afrezza. Stay tuned.
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Jun 13, 2017 8:13:33 GMT -5
In previous discussions of the effectiveness of the different sales forces, IIRC, some have pointed out that the Sanofi sales people were (probably) representing a number of different Sanofi drugs and only devoting a portion of their time and doctor visits to Afrezza. So maybe only, say, 25% of their time / effort was tied to Afrezza. In which case 400 Sanofi reps should really be considered as 100. Whereas Mannkind sales people are 100% about Afrezza. Fair point which I also considered. I could counter that Sanofi's reps had better access to physicians that Afrezza reps. Regardless, I think that right now Afrezza is better off right now than being under the aegis of Sanofi. That is not to say that another pharma partner wouldn't be better for Afrezza. Stay tuned. Very nice use of the word Aegis.
|
|
|
Video ASM
Jun 13, 2017 8:26:29 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by saxcmann on Jun 13, 2017 8:26:29 GMT -5
Assuming Sanofi had 400 reps detailing Afrezza, whereas Mannkind has approx. 85 reps detailing Afrezza (per compound26), then:- At it's new script peak (per Symphony) on 9/25/15, Sanofi's 400 reps sold 394 new scripts or roughly 1 new script per rep, per week. - At that rate per week, Mannkind's salesforce would need to sell 86 new scripts per week to equal Sanofi's best week. - Since Mannkind actually sold 121 new scripts the most recent week ending 6/2 (not it's high), it's 85 person sales force sold 1.4 scripts per week, a 40% greater rate than Sanofi's best. - If Mannkind had Sanofi's 400 reps, it would currently be selling 560 new scripts per week (400 Sanofi equivalent reps x 1.4 scripts per week). Bottom line - assuming the above rep numbers are close to being correct, then Mannkind is doing a significantly better job at selling Afrezza than Sanofi at it's peak. - This still doesn't justify the number of new scripts per, but it does show that Mannkind's marketing to date is having some positive effect, and that more reps and more advertising should generate even greater sales (duh!). Feel free to poke holes in any or all of this. Clearly the analysis rests on the assumed number of reps at each company and particularly those at Sanofi. In previous discussions of the effectiveness of the different sales forces, IIRC, some have pointed out that the Sanofi sales people were (probably) representing a number of different Sanofi drugs and only devoting a portion of their time and doctor visits to Afrezza. So maybe only, say, 25% of their time / effort was tied to Afrezza. In which case 400 Sanofi reps should really be considered as 100. Whereas Mannkind sales people are 100% about Afrezza. sny reps would only bring up if asked by docs or already interested. sny had conflict of interest with own drugs and sales commissions. so what percent is that mnkdfann?
|
|