|
Post by celo on Oct 7, 2017 11:15:25 GMT -5
You guys actually read that article? I scanned it. Way too long and the first couple paragraphs made him sound like a pompous ass.
Spencer's articles are good, except he is too focused on the 10m owed to deerfield. Seems to be a non-factor now that the share price is back up and the addition of another 10 million shares for dilution. But they obviously both have agendas. Just like we do. But we don't write articles for a blog.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Oct 7, 2017 11:16:34 GMT -5
You guys actually read that article? I scanned it. Way too long and the first paragraph made him sound like a pompous ass. Spencer's articles are good, except he is too focused on the 10m owed to deerfield. Seems to be a non-factor now that the share price is back up and the addition of another 10 million shares for dilution. But they obviously both have agendas. Just like we do. But we don't write articles for a blog. agreed.
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Oct 7, 2017 11:16:57 GMT -5
Frankly, I just wish folks here would not post the links. Feraldi gets paid every time someone clicks on and that fact alone is why some of these pundits write outrageous articles with provocative titles. It's click bait. Don't take the bait. You could write one and blow them all out of the water!!
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Oct 7, 2017 11:19:58 GMT -5
You guys actually read that article? I scanned it. Way too long and the first couple paragraphs made him sound like a pompous ass. Spencer's articles are good, except he is too focused on the 10m owed to deerfield. Seems to be a non-factor now that the share price is back up and the addition of another 10 million shares for dilution. But they obviously both have agendas. Just like we do. But we don't write articles for a blog. I just scanned it too. But the comments were great. Go longs!
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Oct 7, 2017 11:56:52 GMT -5
Frankly, I just wish folks here would not post the links. Feraldi gets paid every time someone clicks on and that fact alone is why some of these pundits write outrageous articles with provocative titles. It's click bait. Don't take the bait. You could write one and blow them all out of the water!! A lot of us could do that, but the problem is that we couldn't honestly include the disclaimer that's apparently required by Seeking Alpha: Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.
Although...that disclaimer doesn't specifically rule out the possibility that a spouse or other family member does have a position in the stock.
|
|
|
Post by sr71 on Oct 7, 2017 12:20:16 GMT -5
A lot of us could do that, but the problem is that we couldn't honestly include the disclaimer that's apparently required by Seeking Alpha: Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.
Although...that disclaimer doesn't specifically rule out the possibility that a spouse or other family member does have a position in the stock.
Actually, SA authors can be long - Note the disclaimer at the end of this one by a MNKD long:
seekingalpha.com/article/4111450-mannkind-bullish-fda-label-changes
|
|
trap
Newbie
Posts: 9
Sentiment: Long
|
Post by trap on Oct 7, 2017 12:35:00 GMT -5
I quit reading all SA articles regarding MNKD because I don't want to contribute to their revenue. I read the summaries I find here made by those I trust and otherwise ignore them. Most of the articles on SA are made by paid bashers and the more you debate them the more publicity they get. Every time you follow a link to a SA article you add to their clicks.
|
|
|
Post by sirlurkalot on Oct 7, 2017 12:42:14 GMT -5
Frankly, I just wish folks here would not post the links. Feraldi gets paid every time someone clicks on and that fact alone is why some of these pundits write outrageous articles with provocative titles. It's click bait. Don't take the bait. SA and ymb had similar value and effect on my serenity...I finally went cold turkey and haven't looked back. Feel better, work better; don't miss them at all.
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Oct 7, 2017 12:54:21 GMT -5
Dinner party at $20, a Mnkd cruise at $50. Perfect! It used to be Vegas... but not so into that at this point. Vegas? I didn't know that the Gambling Cowboy is in Vegas? But glad to hear that bioexec25 is picking up the "cruise in Hawaii" at $50.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Oct 7, 2017 13:00:31 GMT -5
my comment was posted. I am going to see what I said. yikes. "The individual must be working for big pharma trying to spread rumors about Afrezza/MNKD product. Here is what has changed. The new label, will allow for insurance coverage. The real reason Afrezza has not gotten/kept higher scripts is until this moment insurance has refused to cover it. What has changed can be seen here, on table four. bit.ly/2y12MeU seen here with Fiasp subcutaneous mealtime insulin information. The compare and contrast is apparent. Fiasp is NovNordisk newest and Apidra; Sanofi new rapid acting mealtime analog is 85 mins to Tmax. bit.ly/2xZwcfT So with afrezza, you can take insulin, control your blood glucose, and you do not have to be afraid you will die in the middle of the night because afrezza is out of your system anywhere from 90 mins to 3 hours, rather than 5 hours later. That is the woopla. Afrezza will not kill you and it will now get insurance coverage. That is Alpha. Diogenes, is about to get his face ripped off."
I am a bit of a drama queen. useless comment posted; check.
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 7, 2017 13:10:29 GMT -5
You guys actually read that article? I scanned it. Way too long and the first couple paragraphs made him sound like a pompous ass. Spencer's articles are good, except he is too focused on the 10m owed to deerfield. Seems to be a non-factor now that the share price is back up and the addition of another 10 million shares for dilution. But they obviously both have agendas. Just like we do. But we don't write articles for a blog. Smart people can explain things with fewer words E=mc2.. That article won't stop Phython Mikes Mannkind...tantamount to a guy standing on the railroad tracks saying Halt! to a freight trian..we all know what happens next!
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Oct 7, 2017 13:16:07 GMT -5
You guys actually read that article? I scanned it. Way too long and the first couple paragraphs made him sound like a pompous ass. Spencer's articles are good, except he is too focused on the 10m owed to deerfield. Seems to be a non-factor now that the share price is back up and the addition of another 10 million shares for dilution. But they obviously both have agendas. Just like we do. But we don't write articles for a blog. Smart people can explain things with fewer words E=mc2.. That article won't stop Phython Mikes Mannkind...tantamount to a guy standing on the railroad tracks saying Halt! to a freight trian..we all know what happens next! www.youtube.com/watch?v=pafY6sZt0FE
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Oct 7, 2017 13:55:25 GMT -5
Frankly, I just wish folks here would not post the links. Feraldi gets paid every time someone clicks on and that fact alone is why some of these pundits write outrageous articles with provocative titles. It's click bait. Don't take the bait. MN, I love you like a brother from another mother but have to disagree with you on this one. I welcome them and try to use them to help educate. We all know Afrezza is the golden goose to PWD and shareholders, however, there are a lot of newbies (especially now that we've been well noticed across the ticker lately) and naive people that read those and take it at face value. I don't mind putting a penny in his pocket for allowing myself and others the opportunity to educate. I used LFD's last one to help get some points across, he is so easy because of how blatantly wrong and misguided he is. I would prefer you actually do pull them up and help educate those readers and lurkers that afterwards will realize this is one of the best companies to invest in and support for the good that it will do not just for PWD but all the other potential health issues diseases it has the potential to help. Stop being near sighted and spiteful regarding putting a penny in his pocket and look at the bigger picture....think outside the "box", like you usually do my friend. Take those negatives and turn them into positives, he is giving you the platform to which to inform correctly
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Oct 7, 2017 14:48:28 GMT -5
FDA made us to show that our hammer is effective, we ended up proving that it is non inferior. But that was because the definition of efficacy is mis-guided and missed the head of nail completely. When one's blood sugar level is not high, such 'efficacy' is counter productive and dangerous. The long delay AND long tail of the other insulins make it very hard to measure and time correctly and that is why many that are on insulin have to settle with elevated A1C. The nails are still sticking out, but we must not risk knocking down the wall. We have known Afrezza is more effective for a long time, but in a totally different and disruptive way. However, we were not allowed to say that to the doctors, or the whole world for that matter. So Afrezza is much more effective but only if you measure efficacy correctly using measures such as time the range or achieved A1C level. If you are measuring the brutal force, yes Afrezza is less brutal. Feroldi is purposely trying to avoid this point. My question to the board is: do you think we should write an SA article to counter his? Yes, his is not worthy of a counter, but those mis-guided readers do deserve to know the WHOLE truth. One does has to go through SA gate for that though. This is why I keep banging on about the need for another trial. The biggest issue with the non-inferior trial data is that Afrezza underperformed the RAA alternative. If you show the data to an endo they will say that Afrezza has a lower hypo rate because it was underdosed. From what we know now the real issue is probably that they didn't do second doses at meal time. UNtil we can rerun the trial with the new dosing approach we will get beaten up by the existing trial data and that is not going to change. New trials now! As for settling for higher levels - most of the reason for that is eating and drinking between meals and not bolusing. There is no way I am going to bolus for all my snacks during the day, life is too short. However it adds up - 12oz latte is 50pts, bag of chips is 75pts, dried pineapple ring (a particular favorite) 40pt, and so on. People tend to have their own threshold for the point at which they will bolus, mine is 30g of carbs, and below that level they let it go and gets correct at the next meal bolus. In the interval you are running high - everyone knows it, but most people just ignore it. In the real world that is what kills time in range, most people don't want to devote the necessary effort to tight control (me amongst them). You could write an article for SA but it has to be framed from an investment view point and not medical or they will just reject it.
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 7, 2017 14:53:52 GMT -5
FDA made us to show that our hammer is effective, we ended up proving that it is non inferior. But that was because the definition of efficacy is mis-guided and missed the head of nail completely. When one's blood sugar level is not high, such 'efficacy' is counter productive and dangerous. The long delay AND long tail of the other insulins make it very hard to measure and time correctly and that is why many that are on insulin have to settle with elevated A1C. The nails are still sticking out, but we must not risk knocking down the wall. We have known Afrezza is more effective for a long time, but in a totally different and disruptive way. However, we were not allowed to say that to the doctors, or the whole world for that matter. So Afrezza is much more effective but only if you measure efficacy correctly using measures such as time the range or achieved A1C level. If you are measuring the brutal force, yes Afrezza is less brutal. Feroldi is purposely trying to avoid this point. My question to the board is: do you think we should write an SA article to counter his? Yes, his is not worthy of a counter, but those mis-guided readers do deserve to know the WHOLE truth. One does has to go through SA gate for that though. This is why I keep banging on about the need for another trial. The biggest issue with the non-inferior trial data is that Afrezza underperformed the RAA alternative. If you show the data to an endo they will say that Afrezza has a lower hypo rate because it was underdosed. From what we know now the real issue is probably that they didn't do second doses at meal time. UNtil we can rerun the trial with the new dosing approach we will get beaten up by the existing trial data and that is not going to change. New trials now! As for settling for higher levels - most of the reason for that is eating and drinking between meals and not bolusing. There is no way I am going to bolus for all my snacks during the day, life is too short. However it adds up - 12oz latte is 50pts, bag of chips is 75pts, dried pineapple ring (a particular favorite) 40pt, and so on. People tend to have their own threshold for the point at which they will bolus, mine is 30g of carbs, and below that level they let it go and gets correct at the next meal bolus. In the interval you are running high - everyone knows it, but most people just ignore it. In the real world that is what kills time in range, most people don't want to devote the necessary effort to tight control (me amongst them). You could write an article for SA but it has to be framed from an investment view point and not medical or they will just reject it. Surely the active pediatric trials will have this dealt with
|
|