|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 19:17:40 GMT -5
It just seems bizarre to think he gets promoted for a year, then gets 2 years additional pay at that job level. So 3 years of pay for 1 year of service. That's not a very good plan ha.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 18:44:00 GMT -5
For a year and a half??? If he was fired, I would think it would be "here's your severance, and here's the door". How is it not severance when Al is taking over as interim CEO per the press release, it sounds like per the usual they are disguising the truth that this is severance pay after a messy breakup. While it's possible they could be disguising the truth to not scare shareholders, it'd be a horrible move if Hakan still has entry to the building if things ended poorly. None of this really makes sense to me- (Hakan) Hey guys, I don't feel like being CEO anymore. Any chance I could do something else and still get paid? (MNKD) Sure, Hakan. We've got extra cash to burn anyway. We'll make a new position for you so we can keep ya around since we like you so much. or (MNKD) Hakan, you're not cutting it. Al wants to take back over. We'll keep you around if you agree to still be productive and do work. (Hakan) Sure guys. I'm loyal and I take no offense to being demoted. It wouldn't be toxic at all to work together after you strip me of all my prior responsibilities. Anyone know if Hakan is under contract through 2017 or if this is the choice of MNKD? Might give us a peek into the financials... Can't imagine they would still offer executive pay with bonuses without an executive role if finances were tight. Ha, I hope not, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 17:40:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 17:38:53 GMT -5
stevil , Like it or not, drug reps cannot give us so much as a free pen anymore. I remember going to medical conventions 10 years ago and coming home with shopping bags full of "stuff". Mostly office supply items - pens, sticky notes, clocks etc. But I also was able to score some rolling stools to furnish my 1st office from one educational event. Those were the days... @liane believe it or not, those "freebies" were a $30 billion/year industry. Seriously that's what I heard internally in bp. Hard to imagine. You should have have seen some of the Cialis freebies. Cialis yardsticks, I am not kidding. It was amazing to walk through some of those office areas. yardsticks. Lol! Not so subtle, were they?
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 17:37:35 GMT -5
So Hakan is still around collecting salary until July 2017 - doesn't sound like he was fired. Still begs the question, why was his successor not prepared beforehand? Or are those here of the impression Al wanted to take back control of the company to get us through this period?
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 17:32:22 GMT -5
Matt said just more than a year ago, Sanofi could have provided a free Spirometer to all MDs who wanted it. They can't do it anymore due to bribery, kickback investigation in the Pharma industry by many countries. Had Afrezza been released 1.5 yrs ago, free Spirometer wouldn't be a problem. Martin S., hedgies, BPs really impeded Afrezza success. We need all the committed longs to kick in $.10 a share to buy a bunch of inexpensive Spirometer so they can be distributed for free to all potentially prescribing Docs. If this were an option it would be great to exercise it. It would easily pay for itself in multiples upon multiples.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 17:26:23 GMT -5
Ya, even working in the pharmacy, they'd bring us mousepads, pens, notepads, etc. One rep, years ago, even brought us lunch.
The new rules make sense- they are supposed to limit corruption and ensure that the patient's best interests are protected. But at the same time, let's use discretion. If patient safety is the goal, allow pharma companies to use their own money to help docs ensure that safety if they're willing to do so. Why pass that burden on to the doc or the patient, or as it stands now, likely both? It's one thing to butter up a doc/pharmacist to earn his favor. It's another thing entirely if docs are equipped to mitigate limitations that were PLACED upon them.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 16:57:16 GMT -5
Matt said just more than a year ago, Sanofi could have provided a free Spirometer to all MDs who wanted it. They can't do it anymore due to bribery, kickback investigation in the Pharma industry by many countries. Had Afrezza been released 1.5 yrs ago, free Spirometer wouldn't be a problem. Martin S., hedgies, BPs really impeded Afrezza success. That seriously blows then. The FDA should be more accommodating if they're going to create bogus rules. I mean, how could this possibly be used for a kick back? How many practices were previously looking to add one of these machines?
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 16:44:05 GMT -5
this thread was moved... wondered about that. I wonder also, is this going to be trump card for Afrezza reps... no doubt spirometers are good for more than just Afrezza use qualification. If I was a doc, I would want one. This is good news that SNY is doing their best to try, gotta give them credit for that. Hopefully it's a sign of their commitment. It's too bad this equipment couldn't be rented for the docs that commit to trying Afrezza out for so many months. It would get the docs to do their own experiments with it, get the patients hooked, etc. That, to me, would be the best thing SNY could do. Not sure if that's financially feasible, though. Because of this, I have a hard time seeing this being a good short-term solution. Seems to me the only docs that would want a spirometry machine are the ones that are already prescribing Afrezza and/or have done enough research on it to have already made up their mind to adopt it. No doc is going to spend his own money to prescribe a medication he doesn't fully believe in, especially if patient demand isn't high for it. If all the docs on the block have one and he's the only one who doesn't, that would be a different story.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 14:27:53 GMT -5
The biggest change to A1c happens in that 90-120 day window. The full name of A1c is actually hemoglobin A1c. The reason you see the biggest change in the 90-120 day window is because the test is designed to see how saturated hemoglobin is with sugar. Hemoglobin's life is only 90-120 days... So any decreases past that point are likely due to a better understanding of how to use the medication, as well as changes to diet and exercise. This is what confuses me about why results showing superiority are taking so long (since, by all accounts, Afrezza should be lowering A1c better than other prandials). The tests only need to take up to 3 months to show this. It's been 9 since Afrezza hit the market. They should have been running simultaneous studies with several different methods to find the best results. I can't imagine the social media folk are the only ones that have been having better success with Afrezza. One would think that lower A1c numbers alone would be enough to claim superiority, since that's the benchmark for how well insulin is working. I haven't researched as well as some of you on here, but the best I've seen Afrezza get to was in the 5.4/5.5% range, so it may be expecting too much to get it sub 5, unless they somehow discover it's really hard to overdose on the stuff. Basals are also responsible for keeping A1c low. Hopefully with Toujeo being more concentrated and having better control better results are on the way. So far the best A1C for Afrezza users I have seen is 4.8: www.afrezzajustbreathe.com/a1cs-of-afrezza-users/. Also it appears this guy's A1C is keeping getting better. “T1 since 1984 ……….. Hba1C: most recent 6.4, 3 months prior 7.7, 3 months prior 9.4 9.4 was prior to being on Afrezza 7.7 was the day before I got the Dexcom 6.4 was 3 months after the Dexcom Presently my Dexcom says my 3 month average is at a 5.9, lowest I’ve ever had it. Proof is in the puding as they say!” www.tudiabetes.org/forum/t/type-2-new-to-cgm-getting-a-g5-what-to-expect/48355/5We need more numbers like that then! Wow. If this proves to be the trend, I'm not sure what trouble SNY would have proving superiority
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 14:03:42 GMT -5
The biggest change to A1c happens in that 90-120 day window. The full name of A1c is actually hemoglobin A1c. The reason you see the biggest change in the 90-120 day window is because the test is designed to see how saturated hemoglobin is with sugar. Hemoglobin's life is only 90-120 days...
So any decreases past that point are likely due to a better understanding of how to use the medication, as well as changes to diet and exercise. This is what confuses me about why results showing superiority are taking so long (since, by all accounts, Afrezza should be lowering A1c better than other prandials). The tests only need to take up to 3 months to show this. It's been 9 since Afrezza hit the market. They should have been running simultaneous studies with several different methods to find the best results. I can't imagine the social media folk are the only ones that have been having better success with Afrezza. One would think that lower A1c numbers alone would be enough to claim superiority, since that's the benchmark for how well insulin is working.
I haven't researched as well as some of you on here, but the best I've seen Afrezza get to was in the 5.4/5.5% range (for type 1's. Let me know if this isn't accurate), so it may be expecting too much to get it sub 5, unless they somehow discover it's really hard to overdose on the stuff. Basals are also responsible for keeping A1c low. Hopefully with Toujeo being more concentrated and having better control better results are on the way.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 24, 2015 13:56:05 GMT -5
Anyone think former Medtronic CEO Bill George may be a good get? I have a strong suspicion that Al would prefer to find someone he knows well and trusts to not only have the best interest of the company at heart, but who would also be a competent leader during these times. Hopefully that person exists, although I can't imagine there isn't great disappointment that Hakan wasn't that guy. Anyway, I know Al sold his company to medtronic, do you have any knowledge if he knows Bill well?
|
|
|
Insurance
Nov 23, 2015 20:15:09 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by stevil on Nov 23, 2015 20:15:09 GMT -5
stevil ... I would say that logic would seem to dictate that if Aprida is at 40% as covered or preferred, it seems unlikely that contractual barriers would prevent Afrezza from matching that, and yet Afrezza is at only 23%. All I know is that I'm simply left guessing at what is going on behind the curtain. Not a great position to be in as an investor. I just looked at the contractual terms b/w sec, mnkd- there IS a non-compete clause. This is a legal minefield. We may be seeing some action (or not) --- maybe all behind the scenes but SNY sure seems little Jekyll and Hyde in appearance, at least publicly. How in the world would MNKD agree to a noncompete clause?! Unless they expected a better label that would have freed them from competing with Apidra?
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 23, 2015 19:48:14 GMT -5
stevil ... I'm having a hard time finding an article that outright states that exclusions are written into deals, but the wording in this article certainly seems to imply that. "The result is a mix of contracts. Express Scripts has an exclusive deal for Viekira Pak that excludes Gilead products from its national formulary, which includes 25 million of its 85 million covered lives. CVS Caremark has an exclusive arrangement for Gilead’s Harvoni, a combination drug that includes Sovaldi and another antiviral, ledipasvir. In addition, some formularies include products from both manufacturers with price concessions from both." www.managedcaremag.com/archives/2015/4/pbms-just-say-no-some-drugs-not-othersIn your opinion all of these rather common cases of having one drug in a class preferred and others not are simply the other companies not agreeing to the same pricing and that at anytime if they did they could gain preferred access? It seems odd that some plans would have Humalog and others Novolog as exclusive preferred if meeting the same price point gained equal status. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that actual exclusions are written into the deals with various companies deemed to have comparable products... i.e. you give me a big discount and I'll only use your product. The above article seems to imply some PBM use the exclusive deals and others don't. Hmmm just read through your link after I posted. It looks like the rules started changing last year in 2014, so that would have been after I was done in the pharmacy. It does appear that new contracts are being written up for exclusivity, so thanks for making me aware of this change. It makes sense... Pharmas used to use discount cards that would reduce the copay from, say $50 to $25. It would likely be cheaper for the pharma to spend that $25 reimbursing the consumer than it would be to negotiate a cheaper price with the insurance company. Slick move by insurance companies. I'm greatly saddened by this news. Insurance companies have become far too powerful. They've already told physicians what they can't prescribe, and now they're telling their clients you're only allowed to be treated with this... How providers or organizations allowed insurance companies to slowly garner all this power is beyond me. Money talks, and my guess is these companies are lining our politician's pockets with gold. This is unethical.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 23, 2015 19:37:22 GMT -5
No, that absolutely DOES happen, just not 100% exclusively. I can't remember which drug it was off the top of my head, but there was one brand that was available in the generic copay tier. All of its competitors were something to the tune of 3 times more expensive at the normal brand copay. I'm not saying that drug companies can't strike deals with insurance companies that would give them sole favorable placement on the formulary. I just don't think they can tell the insurance company not to cover any other drugs entirely. It'd be even more surprising if they could play bully to just one drug in particular.
|
|