MNKD Charts

[Deleted]

Pricing: Even relatively small increases in the cost per patient will add up to massive additional costs due to the millions of patients that potentially will make use of such new products.

[Deleted]

Marketing: MNKD needs to partner. If MNKD is to be successful it needs a partner that is going to be willing to market for them. Therefore we need a well-versed, knowledgeable and experienced marketing partner especially considering we must convince either patients or diabetologists about the opportunities that Afrezza offers. If we hear no news on a partnership even after Greenhill was hired, be alarmed. Picture this, not even a multimillion-dollar ad campaign and a well-established and brand-strong company could save Exubera. Pfizer had been pitching the product (BusinessWeek.com, 7/24/07) on TV and the Web for months and the company reported that Exubera only brought in sales of $12 million in the first nine months of this year. Looking at MNKD's balance sheet, a partnership or buyout is needed or dilution will continue to crush share holders and Afrezza's future will be in jeopardy. 

[StevieRay]

Aug 21, 2013 14:40:15 GMT -5 @douge said:

Aug 21, 2013 14:33:58 GMT -5 StevieRay said:

Maybe you missed this point.

"We’re working with the reimbursement advisory panels to make sure we’re within 5% of the current costs of Humalog and Novolog — so people will get essentially the same reimbursement they get now. We believe that we’ll be covered by most mainstream health plans within six months of launch."

I didn't miss the point... ""We’re working with the reimbursement advisory panels to make sure we’re within 5% of the current costs of Humalog and Novolog — so people will get essentially the same reimbursement they get now. We believe that we’ll be covered by most mainstream health plans within six months of launch."

This does not necessarily equate to Afrezza being within 5%. Much like how management was working with FDA last approval "closely to ensure all bases are covered" only to be rejected and given a CRL. There's a difference between forward looking and optimistic statements versus fact as disclosed in every CC.

Quite frankly you seem a little jaded and don’t fully appreciate the array of benefits Afrezza offers.
A healthy dose of cautious skepticism goes along way but you appear not to fully recognize any of Afrezza’s potential. Or maybe I’m just too optimistic. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see how this all plays out. I’m here for the duration and believe in the product. Based on your perspective I assume you’re not a buyer of MNKD today. Yes?

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2013 14:55:02 GMT -5 StevieRay said:

Aug 21, 2013 14:40:15 GMT -5 @douge said:

I didn't miss the point... ""We’re working with the reimbursement advisory panels to make sure we’re within 5% of the current costs of Humalog and Novolog — so people will get essentially the same reimbursement they get now. We believe that we’ll be covered by most mainstream health plans within six months of launch."

This does not necessarily equate to Afrezza being within 5%. Much like how management was working with FDA last approval "closely to ensure all bases are covered" only to be rejected and given a CRL. There's a difference between forward looking and optimistic statements versus fact as disclosed in every CC.

Quite frankly you seem a little jaded and don’t fully appreciate the array of benefits Afrezza offers.
A healthy dose of cautious skepticism goes along way but you appear not to fully recognize any of Afrezza’s potential. Or maybe I’m just too optimistic. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see how this all plays out. I’m here for the duration and believe in the product. Based on your perspective I assume you’re not a buyer of MNKD today. Yes?

I'm not jaded. I appreciate the benefits Afrezza offers, Afrezza can be a revolutionary product but it has many hurdles to overcome. I'm just thinking long term and wanted to see if anyone had a rebuttal or thoughts and opinions. I appreciate your responses Stevie, thank you. I see the potential in Afrezza, as I believe you do too. My concern is does the greater public see the benefits? The MP3 was an existing technology unnoticed for decades until Apple popularized and capitalized on it's benefits using clever marketing schemes and positioning. Having a superior product is not enough; having the ability to market and sell it must be taken into consideration. Competition must be evaluated and previous historical and relevant events must be taken into consideration. But please remember, we are not just dealing with new technology but also a drug. FDA approval nowadays does not equate to sales as it did in the past. FDA, doctors, patients and diabetologists are all risk-averse and not seeking.

To answer your question about being a buyer of MNKD or not, no I'm not a buyer of MNKD today. I bought in on the last round of dilution and added at the 3 dollar range, which increased my cost average. I sold a small portion after Phase III results and will continue to hold till FDA approval.  I also work options and have warrants.

[Deleted]

Thanks for fixing the format, Chris. Everything get's wacky on my iphone when I respond.

[mdcenter61]

I will go back to the original early part of this thread; I believe that the hiring of Greenhill is actually a very good and bullish sign. I do not believe that Greenhill (nor Deerfield, for that matter) would want to waste valuable time and capital if success was not a high probability. I have owned Mannkind stock for at least four years and two CRL's, and to my knowledge this is the first time that Mannkind has actually brought in the big guns to negotiate a partnership or even possibly a buyout. Management has alluded ad nauseum for years about potential partners but my guess is that, with Deerfield's influence, an outside firm with gravitas in the industry was hired to bring a structured negotiating format and to assuage any fears from a very large shareholder base that Mannkind was not capable of landing a significant partner. Of course, all IMHO. Douge has brought out some excellent points but I, like Stevie Ray, have also done a significant amount of due diligence and have placed my bets on the table.

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2013 15:42:48 GMT -5 mdcenter61 said:

I will go back to the original early part of this thread; I believe that the hiring of Greenhill is actually a very good and bullish sign. I do not believe that Greenhill (nor Deerfield, for that matter) would want to waste valuable time and capital if success was not a high probability. I have owned Mannkind stock for at least four years and two CRL's, and to my knowledge this is the first time that Mannkind has actually brought in the big guns to negotiate a partnership or even possibly a buyout. Management has alluded ad nauseum for years about potential partners but my guess is that, with Deerfield's influence, an outside firm with gravitas in the industry was hired to bring a structured negotiating format and to assuage any fears from a very large shareholder base that Mannkind was not capable of landing a significant partner. Of course, all IMHO. Douge has brought out some excellent points but I, like Stevie Ray, have also done a significant amount of due diligence and have placed my bets on the table.

FDA approval is likely thus Deerfield entered a deal with MNKD, which by the way was heavily favorable for Deerfield. Greenhill is a step in the direction I would say and is a response to the lack of potential partners MNKD has been able to attract. MD,  I believe you will be rewarded with an FDA approval this time around but the question to hold shares after approval is highly questionable if MNKD has no partner. There will be plenty of time to buy back MNKD at a lower price after approval if you believe in the product. I plan on selling 80% of my holdings if circumstances don't change (as of present in regards to a partner) upon FDA approval to buy back in at a lower price. Looking at MNKD in a short term perspective, LOC due Q1 2014 (January) and Dec convertibles are due and potential additional dilution from the Deerfield deal (max 12 Million, not much but still effects p/e). 

[mdcenter61]

That seems like a reasonable investment theory to me Douge; considering the amount of shares and warrants I accumulated while the price was down in the 2.00's, I will certainly be taking a large portion off the table in the run up to PDUFA (my original egg money plus some) and leave some shares on the table as well. Want to get fat but not slaughtered!

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2013 16:30:53 GMT -5 mdcenter61 said:

That seems like a reasonable investment theory to me Douge; considering the amount of shares and warrants I accumulated while the price was down in the 2.00's, I will certainly be taking a large portion off the table in the run up to PDUFA (my original egg money plus some) and leave some shares on the table as well. Want to get fat but not slaughtered!

I will be doing the same. Minus the investor side of me... I really hope Afrezza can change how diabetes is treated and a paradigm shift truly occurs. So many will benefit from Afrezza it's great that we'll be applying for European approval as well. The focus on the American market opposed to a complete global expansion was a wise strategy by MNKD. It'll test out the waters and show if Afrezza has true market potential. A 15% penetration would bode well for MNKD and is possible in 3-5 years time but I don't know if many investors are willing to hold that long given the numerous obstacles facing MNKD.

[mannmade]

Am not so sure hiring Greenhill is a bad sign (with due respect to all of your opinions as you likely know more than I do) However, consider the following: 1.) I spoke with a good friend of mine who is in this field and he says that while he can't say for sure with Greenhill in this case, it is more than likely they will only get paid for success. So that means they will incur very significant fees in the due diligence process with at least 5 to 10 Big Pharmas which will require a significant upfront cost (professional staff and support, etc) to Greenhill. 2.) Given that Mnkd would likely have to hire a firm to do the deal once a pharma partner is identified, it makes sense to hire Greenhill.   Am confident that mnkd has a headstart in conversations with some potential partners which they continue now thru GH. Also remember mnkd always said that they were talking to some potential partners (pre release of the P3 results) but would likely engage some new ones (or resume talk with those that decided to wait post results) so the timing in my opinion to hire GH now, makes sense to me. Lastly, to extrapolate from my earlier notes, GH would not likely enter this deal on a success fee basis unless they thought their chances of success were darn good, nor would they spend the million(s) of dollars upfront to properly conduct the amount of due diligence it will likely take multiplied by X number of potential partners. I have sold small companies as I mentioned in an earlier post. Cost me 125k to sell one small company (with no govt reg issues) to a Fortune Company.  Because of the above it is also in GH's interest to expedite this process, not just mnkd's. So I am thinking that hiring of Gh is well timed and hopefully they got a head start from previous conversations mnkd likely already had with some potential partners.

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2013 19:31:33 GMT -5 mannmade said:

Am not so sure hiring Greenhill is a bad sign (with due respect to all of your opinions as you likely know more than I do) However, consider the following: 1.) I spoke with a good friend of mine who is in this field and he says that while he can't say for sure with Greenhill in this case, it is more than likely they will only get paid for success. So that means they will incur very significant fees in the due diligence process with at least 5 to 10 Big Pharmas which will require a significant upfront cost (professional staff and support, etc) to Greenhill. 2.) Given that Mnkd would likely have to hire a firm to do the deal once a pharma partner is identified, it makes sense to hire Greenhill.   Am confident that mnkd has a headstart in conversations with some potential partners which they continue now thru GH. Also remember mnkd always said that they were talking to some potential partners (pre release of the P3 results) but would likely engage some new ones (or resume talk with those that decided to wait post results) so the timing in my opinion to hire GH now, makes sense to me. Lastly, to extrapolate from my earlier notes, GH would not likely enter this deal on a success fee basis unless they thought their chances of success were darn good, nor would they spend the million(s) of dollars upfront to properly conduct the amount of due diligence it will likely take multiplied by X number of potential partners. I have sold small companies as I mentioned in an earlier post. Cost me 125k to sell one small company (with no govt reg issues) to a Fortune Company.  Because of the above it is also in GH's interest to expedite this process, not just mnkd's. So I am thinking that hiring of Gh is well timed and hopefully they got a head start from previous conversations mnkd likely already had with some potential partners.

Can I ask you, did you approach the Fortune500 company or did they approach you?



Also, in this case we're talking about a buyout in Mannkind's case it will more likely be a partnership in my belief.

[mannmade]

They were a client for 17 years and they approached us. So they actually knew a lot about our business ahead of time. Yet despite that we had to spend a considerable amount of time and resources to complete this deal. And as i said we were not involved in a business that had any direct govt oversight or regulatory issues. And I agree with you more likely a partnership for a whole lot of reasons but i am fine with that as I think may best serve everyone in the long run (Just my opinion)

[Deleted]

See they approached you. The difference I see here is MNKD hired Greenhill at an additional cost because they were struggling to find a partnership.

You're right a considerable amount of time and resources will be used up in the search for a partnership and this is another point, I want to make.

[mannmade]

I respectfully disagree. Think was likely premature until results announced. Perfect timing (in my opinion) to announce hiring of GH (likely had GH deal in place month before results announced)



Mnkd has likely had serious conversations w a few potential partners but think we all knew (or should have) that best partner and best deal would not happen until all legit contenders have been evaluated. And mnkd said some serious potential partners would wait to discuss until after p3 results announced.



Sent from my iPad

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2013 20:41:48 GMT -5 mannmade said:

I respectfully disagree. Think was likely premature until results announced. Perfect timing (in my opinion) to announce hiring of GH (likely had GH deal in place month before results announced)



Mnkd has likely had serious conversations w a few potential partners but think we all knew (or should have) that best partner and best deal would not happen until all legit contenders have been evaluated. And mnkd said some serious potential partners would wait to discuss until after p3 results announced.



Sent from my iPad

Here, in the last CC they announced they hired Greenhill to start a four month process once this process is finished and partners are narrowed down it will take on average an additional 3-5 months to complete a partnership if one is seen. August plus 4 months leads us to December plus three to five months gives us January or February before we even hear about news of a partnership in my belief. So at the very least we are 4 months away (as you have stated it is a long process and MNKD would and should way out every possible scenario), even if MNKD had existing conversations with possible partners. Note that Al Mann also drives a hard bargain and is majority share holder.

MNKD is in a strangely disadvantaged yet advantaged position. They have a manufacturing plant, the insulin, the patents, the device and the drugs but lack the cash and marketing team and have yet to gain approval. What can a partner offer MNKD? Milestone payments and a marketing team but why step in when approval is not known and commercial success is highly questionable. There are still a lot of road blocks ahead.  A large bio would much rather buy Mannkind then partner with them in my opinion. Mannkind still has a lot to prove. While Mannkind might be a great speculative play for an investor this does not translate to a successful company. Obvious prospects for physical growth in a business do not translate into obvious profits for investors. Mannkind has no revenue at all mind you! Yes this is common for biotechs but remember operations for profit should be based not on optimism but on arithmetic.