|
|
Post by jonny80s on Mar 13, 2018 16:51:16 GMT -5
We are almost done with the first quarter.
This is what I want to know: where is the money coming from to fund the follow-up, larger scale, ad campaign?
And when is it going to start?
Right now all I see is funding with no ad campaign for 2018.
June's ADA causing bump in scripts... Most likely looking at the end of the 4th quarter possibly 2019 1st quarter for that.
From Castagna's own mouth, it take's close to a year for advertising to have an effect on scripts. Am I to believe that we have yet to see the scripts increase from the trial ad campaign? And we shouldn't expect a bump in scripts from a follow-up campaign until mid 2019 or later?
Thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Mar 13, 2018 18:01:32 GMT -5
We are almost done with the first quarter. This is what I want to know: where is the money coming from to fund the follow-up, larger scale, ad campaign? And when is it going to start? Right now all I see is funding with no ad campaign for 2018. June's ADA causing bump in scripts... Most likely looking at the end of the 4th quarter possibly 2019 1st quarter for that. From Castagna's own mouth, it take's close to a year for advertising to have an effect on scripts. Am I to believe that we have yet to see the scripts increase from the trial ad campaign? And we shouldn't expect a bump in scripts from a follow-up campaign until mid 2019 or later? Thoughts. In my history of calculating direct marketing media metrics, the simplified version is taking the period where there was advertising on (December), comparing it to a period without media advertising (January) and taking the delta in new prescriptions as an estimate of what the media spend generated in new sales. This is overly optimistic as many here will say December had PWD's renewing their scripts due to end of the year deductable and oop max. Ignoring those users who front loaded their RX and based on a media spend of a few million dollars, the incremental new prescriptions came in at an estimated cost in the low five figures. Only the company can know how well it did, as they can look at new scripts in each market DMA (Neilsen TV geographic area) and see if a needs was pushed forward. There were some large and small markets so they have some good data to work with. They will need to get the cost per acquisition down to the low four figures per new script before it becomes cost effective to run another campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Mar 13, 2018 19:39:51 GMT -5
We are almost done with the first quarter. This is what I want to know: where is the money coming from to fund the follow-up, larger scale, ad campaign? And when is it going to start? Right now all I see is funding with no ad campaign for 2018. June's ADA causing bump in scripts... Most likely looking at the end of the 4th quarter possibly 2019 1st quarter for that. From Castagna's own mouth, it take's close to a year for advertising to have an effect on scripts. Am I to believe that we have yet to see the scripts increase from the trial ad campaign? And we shouldn't expect a bump in scripts from a follow-up campaign until mid 2019 or later? Thoughts. In my history of calculating direct marketing media metrics, the simplified version is taking the period where there was advertising on (December), comparing it to a period without media advertising (January) and taking the delta in new prescriptions as an estimate of what the media spend generated in new sales. This is overly optimistic as many here will say December had PWD's renewing their scripts due to end of the year deductable and oop max. Ignoring those users who front loaded their RX and based on a media spend of a few million dollars, the incremental new prescriptions came in at an estimated cost in the low five figures. Only the company can know how well it did, as they can look at new scripts in each market DMA (Neilsen TV geographic area) and see if a needs was pushed forward. There were some large and small markets so they have some good data to work with. They will need to get the cost per acquisition down to the low four figures per new script before it becomes cost effective to run another campaign. Dennis, Apparently, your "history" didn't include calculating the effect of advertising on prescription drug sales, especially drugs such as Afrezza which face major challenges that cars, insurance policies, dog food, and over-the-counter drugs do not. Unlike those items, a consumer cannot buy Afrezza the same day or (usually) for months after seeing a commercial -- so your arguments about December ads and December sales are invalid. |
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Mar 13, 2018 20:29:02 GMT -5
We are almost done with the first quarter. This is what I want to know: where is the money coming from to fund the follow-up, larger scale, ad campaign? And when is it going to start? Right now all I see is funding with no ad campaign for 2018. June's ADA causing bump in scripts... Most likely looking at the end of the 4th quarter possibly 2019 1st quarter for that. From Castagna's own mouth, it take's close to a year for advertising to have an effect on scripts. Am I to believe that we have yet to see the scripts increase from the trial ad campaign? And we shouldn't expect a bump in scripts from a follow-up campaign until mid 2019 or later? Thoughts. “From Castagna's own mouth, it take's close to a year for advertising to have an effect on scripts.” Can you please provide a link to the source? |
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Mar 13, 2018 20:36:40 GMT -5
In my history of calculating direct marketing media metrics, the simplified version is taking the period where there was advertising on (December), comparing it to a period without media advertising (January) and taking the delta in new prescriptions as an estimate of what the media spend generated in new sales. This is overly optimistic as many here will say December had PWD's renewing their scripts due to end of the year deductable and oop max. Ignoring those users who front loaded their RX and based on a media spend of a few million dollars, the incremental new prescriptions came in at an estimated cost in the low five figures. Only the company can know how well it did, as they can look at new scripts in each market DMA (Neilsen TV geographic area) and see if a needs was pushed forward. There were some large and small markets so they have some good data to work with. They will need to get the cost per acquisition down to the low four figures per new script before it becomes cost effective to run another campaign. Dennis, Apparently, your "history" didn't include calculating the effect of advertising on prescription drug sales, especially drugs such as Afrezza which face major challenges that cars, insurance policies, dog food, and over-the-counter drugs do not. Unlike those items, a consumer cannot buy Afrezza the same day or (usually) for months after seeing a commercial -- so your arguments about December ads and December sales are invalid. It means you are accepting a higher cost per acquisition than I state as you are discounting many of the conversions. Only management can see if there was a long tail effect in those DMAs. |
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Mar 13, 2018 21:38:35 GMT -5
No, I'm not "accepting" any such thing. The cost per acquisition is exactly the same for a patient who saw Afrezza commericials in December and miraculously got a paid-for Afrezza prescription in the same month and another patient who saw the same ads in December, saw a doctor in February, and managed to successfully jump through all the hoops by March or April. Or haven't you been following how difficult it is to get a doctor to prescribe Afrezza and an insurance company to pay for it?
|
|
|
|
Post by jonny80s on Mar 14, 2018 7:26:05 GMT -5
It was discussed here in the forums. It was either a radio interview or a during a Q+A after a presentation where he discussed how many times an individual would have to see a commercial before being motivated to take the next step. And with Afrezza there are many steps before attaining your first prescription.
The way it sounded to me is that the "how many times an individual has to see an ad before they decide they have to have the product" comment was purely theoretical, but he did say it. An oversimplification simplification of marketing 101.
|
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Mar 14, 2018 8:54:06 GMT -5
In my history of calculating direct marketing media metrics, the simplified version is taking the period where there was advertising on (December), comparing it to a period without media advertising (January) and taking the delta in new prescriptions as an estimate of what the media spend generated in new sales. This is overly optimistic as many here will say December had PWD's renewing their scripts due to end of the year deductable and oop max. Ignoring those users who front loaded their RX and based on a media spend of a few million dollars, the incremental new prescriptions came in at an estimated cost in the low five figures. Only the company can know how well it did, as they can look at new scripts in each market DMA (Neilsen TV geographic area) and see if a needs was pushed forward. There were some large and small markets so they have some good data to work with. They will need to get the cost per acquisition down to the low four figures per new script before it becomes cost effective to run another campaign. Dennis, Apparently, your "history" didn't include calculating the effect of advertising on prescription drug sales, especially drugs such as Afrezza which face major challenges that cars, insurance policies, dog food, and over-the-counter drugs do not. Unlike those items, a consumer cannot buy Afrezza the same day or (usually) for months after seeing a commercial -- so your arguments about December ads and December sales are invalid. I agree 100 percent that for a drug like Afrezza there is a potential long tail effect of advertising. You loose he long tail when you take a drug like Afrezza that has a 5percent or less awareness rate per mike c and then stop the media campaign. No media no consumer product recognition no longtail effect in the test media markets. |
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Mar 14, 2018 9:32:02 GMT -5
We are almost done with the first quarter. This is what I want to know: where is the money coming from to fund the follow-up, larger scale, ad campaign? And when is it going to start? Right now all I see is funding with no ad campaign for 2018. June's ADA causing bump in scripts... Most likely looking at the end of the 4th quarter possibly 2019 1st quarter for that. From Castagna's own mouth, it take's close to a year for advertising to have an effect on scripts. Am I to believe that we have yet to see the scripts increase from the trial ad campaign? And we shouldn't expect a bump in scripts from a follow-up campaign until mid 2019 or later? Thoughts. Regarding your statement that Mike said it takes close to a year for advertising to have an effect on scripts, you are mistaken. |
|
|
|
Post by jonny80s on Mar 14, 2018 10:10:09 GMT -5
Are you saying they are somehow miraculously targeting populations that have a high percentage of people coming up on regular diabetes checkups and know exactly what that group of people are watching on TV, searching for on the internet and listening to on OTA radio? Because if that is the case... sure, it will have an immediate effect... something like 3-6months after they jump through all the hoops/road blocks. Sure the Doc/Nurse may write a script. That doesn't mean it is filled promptly. Brotherm1 you are correct, I was way off. Not sure where I got the 1 year time frame from. From the Fool interview: Castagna: I think in terms of turning into prescriptions, it will take about two months to start to see a meaningful lift. We'll measure every week, but in general, you think about a patient has a visit six to eight weeks out, maybe 12 weeks out, so you've got to see the TV [commercial] probably three to five times, and then they're reminded for the next doctor's appointment. We can tell you in the first week of the TV ad, Google search AdWords are up, website hits are up fourfold, copay downloads are up. So we can tell you all the early metrics that would indicate it's working are up, but the real metric to me is going to be prescriptions and people taking the drug. And that will just take some time, but the early metrics are positive so far. www.fool.com/investing/2017/11/19/an-interview-with-mannkind-ceo-michael-castagna.aspx |
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Mar 14, 2018 11:15:42 GMT -5
Are you saying they are somehow miraculously targeting populations that have a high percentage of people coming up on regular diabetes checkups and know exactly what that group of people are watching on TV, searching for on the internet and listening to on OTA radio? Because if that is the case... sure, it will have an immediate effect... something like 3-6months after they jump through all the hoops/road blocks. Sure the Doc/Nurse may write a script. That doesn't mean it is filled promptly. Brotherm1 you are correct, I was way off. Not sure where I got the 1 year time frame from. From the Fool interview: Castagna: I think in terms of turning into prescriptions, it will take about two months to start to see a meaningful lift. We'll measure every week, but in general, you think about a patient has a visit six to eight weeks out, maybe 12 weeks out, so you've got to see the TV [commercial] probably three to five times, and then they're reminded for the next doctor's appointment. We can tell you in the first week of the TV ad, Google search AdWords are up, website hits are up fourfold, copay downloads are up. So we can tell you all the early metrics that would indicate it's working are up, but the real metric to me is going to be prescriptions and people taking the drug. And that will just take some time, but the early metrics are positive so far. www.fool.com/investing/2017/11/19/an-interview-with-mannkind-ceo-michael-castagna.aspxnot all appointments are 3-6 months out. In my very limited data set of two our endo appointments happen within a few weeks or sooner. Also there are already potential PWD that are waiting for their appointments and see the test commercials. There are potentially touch points in the upper sales funnel that MNKD could see. Views to the Afrezza website from the DMA to gauge interest. Geo location within a DMA is very accurate by IP address. They are running Google analytics via a wordpress plug in on their Afrezza site. They would be able to see bounce metrics, and how many call to actions those users in the targeted DMA before they get to their Doctors appointments. I think we can conclude the media efforts in both upper funnel and lower funnel activites were poor and they will need to retool before we see another media campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Mar 14, 2018 11:41:24 GMT -5
We are almost done with the first quarter. This is what I want to know: where is the money coming from to fund the follow-up, larger scale, ad campaign? And when is it going to start? Right now all I see is funding with no ad campaign for 2018. The well is almost dry as far as cash reserves go. The company will need to raise money by the end of March in order to simply continue operations going. Depending on how much cash is raised we will be able to forecast when another ad campaign will start up. Given the current script numbers, a significant (well funded) sales effort with marketing will be needed to reach the guidance that was given for this year. |
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Mar 14, 2018 14:07:50 GMT -5
We are almost done with the first quarter. This is what I want to know: where is the money coming from to fund the follow-up, larger scale, ad campaign? And when is it going to start? Right now all I see is funding with no ad campaign for 2018. The well is almost dry as far as cash reserves go. The company will need to raise money by the end of March in order to simply continue operations going. Depending on how much cash is raised we will be able to forecast when another ad campaign will start up. Given the current script numbers, a significant (well funded) sales effort with marketing will be needed to reach the guidance that was given for this year. MNKD would need to tool their campaign to average a 1-2K for incremental new RX's. Event will more funding, MNKD needs to recoup TV campaign expenses within a year, more likely a positive spend ROI which would be around $500 per incremental new RX. eg, a $5,000,000 campaign to be ROI spend positive would need to generate 10K new prescriptions. |
|
|
|
Post by roguesuerte on Mar 14, 2018 20:58:27 GMT -5
I don't think we will see any bump in script numbers for the very short-lived half ass ad campaign MNKD waged. Exposure and advertising have been the problem from the get-go. Now they have to wait show stat results till the ada in June. I hope the results don't get embargoed like the delay in reporting results. Sorry folk but I am losing patience. I bought more after they bumped up earnings and Mike changed his FB page to the Dubai nightlife pics(what was that all about?) Tired of being strung along here.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Mar 14, 2018 23:04:01 GMT -5
Our Mike didn't change his Facebook page to include "Dubai nightlife pics." That was a different Michael Castagna (there are over 60 on Facebook).
|
|
