|
Post by traderdennis on Oct 16, 2017 20:35:51 GMT -5
The problem with dtc advertising on t.v. is the cost. Ive heard one 30 sec spot costs on average about 350k IMO tv ads would be the fastest way to make the public aware, but can we afford that? I trust that Mike and company have this all figured out already, where we can get the most bang for our buck and reach as many people as possible. The label change allows us to finally talk about Afrezza as it truly is and that makes all of the difference. Effective advertising pre label change was problematic. They were smart to wait. Recent events have been huge and it's only going to get better. As I've pointed out before there's no way MannKind could effectively use 30 second spots for Afrezza. How could you possibly combine a positive message with all the warnings required by the FDA in 30 seconds? I've never seen a 30 second spot for a prescription drug that included FDA warnings. Remnant tv ads will run a lot less than 350k. The internet subscription fashion site I worked at spent about 1 million a month a received very good clearance for its demographic. Afrezza would be a different demo but could initially spend that level on cable channels for testing of ads
|
|
|
Post by promann on Oct 16, 2017 22:04:59 GMT -5
IMO it is still going to be a challenge to get endos and general practice to change what they are doing. We are talking disruptive change here. Way different from the current standard of care. I still say this will be patient driven to a large degree. So somehow we have to reach the public at the same time we are educating medical pros and now we can be so much more effective in our marketing. Though I agree that Afrezza needs to be patient driven the other problem is patients are going to the doctors and asking for it and they say no. I’ve heard about this personally and many times on this board. The patients are for the most part going to trust their doctors opinion and are not going to fight for it. We have problems on many fronts that needs working on but it’s very important to get the doctors on board.
|
|
|
Post by lb on Oct 16, 2017 22:28:54 GMT -5
I'd wait until pediatric studies are concluded, and then put something like "proven to be safe for children ages 4 and up" on any advertisement. Any doubter would think, " gee, it's even save for little kids, it must be good..."
|
|
|
Post by seanismorris on Oct 17, 2017 2:16:20 GMT -5
TV is so 20th century... besides sports programming what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.
I hear people over 60 still read news papers, made from actual paper... crazy.
It’s been about 20 years since I read a magazine. OK. Maybe 15 years, I was getting an oil change and they were just sitting there.
I think everyone gets where I’m going with this...
OK. Here’s another hint. Supposedly the Russians meddled with our election with ads spending about $50K.
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Oct 17, 2017 2:49:13 GMT -5
Yeah ... think you should just swing ... because you are definitely off the deep end.
But, that just mytakeonit
|
|
|
Post by seanismorris on Oct 17, 2017 3:14:07 GMT -5
Yeah ... think you should just swing ... because you are definitely off the deep end. But, that just mytakeonit Which part? The fact that TV is a waste of money that we can’t afford? We could spend millions on TV ads vs. 10s of thousands on Internet ones... Here’s a chart of TV viewership www.marketingcharts.com/featured-24817For the under 50 crowd the number of hours watched is tanking. When visiting my nieces and nephews, I never see them watching TV... they are either watching videos on YouTube or Netflix. (usually on their phones) If that doesn’t convince you, take a look at Googles and Netflix’s stock over the last 10 years. FYI: A 30s commercial during a popular show is about $500,000 and to be effective they need to be viewed several times. Sorry, I’m not the one off the deep end here. The TV advertising idea is a dead end for Afrezza, it may work for cars and erectile dysfunction drugs but it’s a bad fit for us.
|
|
|
Post by mydogskip on Oct 17, 2017 5:19:50 GMT -5
Yeah ... think you should just swing ... because you are definitely off the deep end. But, that just mytakeonit Which part? The fact that TV is a waste of money that we can’t afford? We could spend millions on TV ads vs. 10s of thousands on Internet ones... Here’s a chart of TV viewership www.marketingcharts.com/featured-24817For the under 50 crowd the number of hours watched is tanking. When visiting my nieces and nephews, I never see them watching TV... they are either watching videos on YouTube or Netflix. (usually on their phones) If that doesn’t convince you, take a look at Googles and Netflix’s stock over the last 10 years. FYI: A 30s commercial during a popular show is about $500,000 and to be effective they need to be viewed several times. Sorry, I’m not the one off the deep end here. The TV advertising idea is a dead end for Afrezza, it may work for cars and erectile dysfunction drugs but it’s a bad fit for us. Come on Sean, don't you know that the armchair CEOs on message boards know a whole lot more about running a biotech than actual CEOs in the trenches? As many have said on here and on other places, had MNKD just ran ads, like during the Superbowl, MNKD would be in a much better place than it is now. Never ever underestimate online group thinkers!
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Oct 17, 2017 5:44:46 GMT -5
Lol, we definitely need TV! We have a huge T2 over 50 market to tap into. They watch in their homes, at sports bars, at the gym while doing cardio!! Dr Walt Combs reads a “paper” news paper when he rides the lifecycle called the Wall Street Journal, ( the stock section:-)
|
|
|
Post by therealisaching on Oct 17, 2017 5:55:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Oct 17, 2017 6:07:10 GMT -5
Great post! Was just going to add that to mine:-) If BP wasn’t getting results they wouldn’t be doing it!
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Oct 17, 2017 6:23:07 GMT -5
The creation of the insulin, outsulin characters was to drive home a technical advantage which may not be easily understood by everyone and hasn't yet been effective. The real advantage of Afrezza is improving quality of life. Users already know this and the rest of the world needs to learn this. With the label improvement, any news ads, i.e. TV, web or print needs to show how the label chart improves quality of life. This would be similar to the Afrezza TV ads run on "Reversed" but with much better clarity and more easily understood. For example, sad insulin, outsulin characters could quickly come to life and become happy characters by following the chart when using Afrezza.
|
|
|
Post by boca1girl on Oct 17, 2017 7:03:57 GMT -5
I'd wait until pediatric studies are concluded, and then put something like "proven to be safe for children ages 4 and up" on any advertisement. Any doubter would think, " gee, it's even save for little kids, it must be good..." I agree, it will be a shot in the arm when Afrezza is approved for children, but we can’t wait that long to increase awareness for adults.
|
|
|
Post by sweedee79 on Oct 17, 2017 9:29:31 GMT -5
IMO it is still going to be a challenge to get endos and general practice to change what they are doing. We are talking disruptive change here. Way different from the current standard of care. I still say this will be patient driven to a large degree. So somehow we have to reach the public at the same time we are educating medical pros and now we can be so much more effective in our marketing. Though I agree that Afrezza needs to be patient driven the other problem is patients are going to the doctors and asking for it and they say no. I’ve heard about this personally and many times on this board. The patients are for the most part going to trust their doctors opinion and are not going to fight for it. We have problems on many fronts that needs working on but it’s very important to get the doctors on board. Yes, all true.... but there have only been a small number of patients asking for Afrezza. I think someone said that 90% of PWD still haven't heard of it. If many many patients start asking their docs for or about Afrezza, the docs will take notice.
When we were in to see the endo, one of the things she mentioned is that there didn't seem to be much demand for the drug. If the demand is there docs will have to begin to change.
When patients start hearing about the excellent control they will want it. With the label change we are now able to say things we couldn't say before. Demand will get docs on board and now we also have better dosing instructions. There was so much confusion before, not so much anymore, all has changed. Management has done an amazing job.
|
|
|
Post by bradleysbest on Oct 17, 2017 10:46:19 GMT -5
someone (Mike) said that 90% of PWD still haven't heard of Afrezza.... I do not think the Afrezza ads that were in the NFL football programs helped much. Agree 100% with aching's post!
|
|
|
Post by qwertqwert on Oct 17, 2017 10:49:52 GMT -5
someone (Mike) said that 90% of PWD still haven't heard of Afrezza.... I do not think the Afrezza ads that were in the NFL football programs helped much. Agree 100% with aching's post! Wow, that was a year ago, it was in the MLB playoffs, not NFL.
|
|