|
Post by esstan2001 on Apr 4, 2015 13:23:56 GMT -5
I'm not sure about the slow rollout but it appears Sanofi is dragging its feet on training their reps and getting the word out about AFREZZA. Most of the rollout appears to me to be Mannkind driven and word of mouth. I'm beginning to question Sanofi's motives behind this partnership. Frustrating as this is, it makes no logical sense from a financial standpoint for Sanofi to do anything but follow their plan (unknown to us) that benefits them most. You can run the worst case nefarious scenarios, but nothing comes to the surface since, if Afrezza looks to be a big success, Sanofi can just make a run at Afrezza or Mannkind. Any scenario involving some form of collusion to keep Afrezza off the market or minimize its chances just doesn't seem worth the risk. Any dragging of the feet almost certainly has to do with ensuring the success of the rollout, given both he timing of, and the amounts of resources that are allocated.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Apr 1, 2015 13:34:24 GMT -5
How anyone can loan out their shares to agents that they despise, don’t trust and who will then proceed to bash the price of the shares down is beyond me. That’s just asking for trouble. ....I was strongly of the not-lend theory...but then I kept thinking about it...and my thoughts have changed..... Same here... was adamant about keeping my position in cash accounts so my brokerage could not lend them. But once I found I could get paid 'usury rates' to lend them, I too reasoned that providing more rope would be OK as long as I collect $$, and buy more.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 28, 2015 19:48:23 GMT -5
... As Bobw pointed out, those who lent their shares out no longer own the shares, thus do not have voting rights. Those voting rights belong to the 'shorts.' does anyone know when the date of record for proxy (ownership of shares) is- I have searched the 10-K to no avail; sent a request in to Matt thru the IR website (no reply for 4 days) Anyone have his direct email? I want to recall my shares from the lending program before the shorts get proxy for them
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 27, 2015 9:05:52 GMT -5
Does anyone know the date of record for shareholder ownership- I want to pull my shares form the lending program before then, so no short has proxy over any of my shares. ... If you lend shares, they are no longer registered in your name. They are registered with person that buys them from the borrower. Mannkind has no knowledge of anyone's lent out shares and cannot call them back. When you lend shares, you no longer own them.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 15, 2015 7:17:58 GMT -5
C'mon Baba, That title belongs to el Jefe, our very own pro tour golfer, a.k.a the deliberator (in more ways than one). You can't take that away from him!
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 9, 2015 8:23:53 GMT -5
So whatever changes were made to the design, I suspect dreamboat had to ensure a more turbulent flow at the cartridge to help pick up more techno sphere out of the corners, to improve dose delivery. The other aspect is likely an even and continuous distribution of TS into the air flow drawn to the lungs. That way, at the lung surface, a rapid dissociation of all insulin occurs, and it is distributed over a large lung area.
The straw, while it is possible to ensure all the dose is vacuumed out of the cartridge, may deliver large hits in short moments and not very evenly distributed over a large area. I would not want a concentration or clump taking longer to be acted upon; the lung may treat it differently (as an irritant?) at least in the dosing long term / long run. Ok once or twice if stuck without an inhaler, and hundreds or straws burning holes in my pockets.
If not all the insulin were to immediately dissociate, I suspect it works well enough precisely because dosing is not so critical anyway, as long as it is in excess as has been observed.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 8, 2015 16:20:33 GMT -5
thank God some people can be trusted :-)
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 8, 2015 16:12:39 GMT -5
Too funny...
first, I moved to a PC from my iPad, and could not find my post... thinking Liane just pulled my post and was toying with me.
Second Baba, I was about to reply to your comments about black SUV's... something innocuous along the lines that today they are a bit more sophisticated than that (utility vans, etc.)
When I clicked reply, I was not eligible to reply to the thread. OK then, I tried again.
Boy, was I really beginning to worry until I noticed that I was not logged in to Proboards. I always thought I would not see a 'reply' button available when not being logged in.
Whew- I started to suspect that you were all in on the conspiracy! :-)
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 8, 2015 15:06:36 GMT -5
Well Liane, now that the FCC has taken control of the Internet... Yeah, I've (half jokingly) now become a bit of a paranoid conspiracy theorist. :-)
We'll see if this post gets through and stands, and I am not worried about you moderators.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 6, 2015 9:38:58 GMT -5
good luck... keep us posted; I hope it works out for your son.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 4, 2015 14:15:33 GMT -5
now it says 850k for me too. go figure.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 4, 2015 14:00:14 GMT -5
hmmm... I just checked availability and it came back with N/A
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 4, 2015 13:52:41 GMT -5
"Are you implying that every single person is going to have a positive experience with Afrezza?" NO. There was a fair drop out rate in the trial, so I don't expect this to bee for everyone. "Are you implying that we should ignore any non-glowing reviews by actual diabetics taking the actual product?" NO. But this particular review arrives around the time of the short attack, and presents many debunked assertions (not all): As for the reiviewer assertions: 1. Pricing- fine you can buy in to this being an issue but the time of action and method of delivery differentiate this from any other RAI. 2. Discrete- Notable that within 5 days this guy got to church and a movie. Wonder if he works. Not having witnessed an inhale except on youtube (seemed innocuous) I'll let you have this one. 3. Not so fast- OK all the scientific data were faked. Including the CGM jpegs from new users. Right. And Humalog acts faster for him than anybody? Maybe he misread the labels for the 2 drugs in his runoff. 4. OLD SCHOOL? Monomeric insulin is immediately ready to find it's receptor sites. It does not need time to break apart like dimers or hexamers. All it needs is to disassociate from technosphere carrier, which is near immediate in the ph change of the lung. BTW, how did the reviewer use it for 20 years since it is not stable without technosphere? And you wonder why I question the voracity of the post! 5. NO fine tuning? The FDA approved the dosing label- if you need 1-4 units, use 4. bla bla bla. And there are MANY reasoned explanations on this board as to why this is the case- that fine tuning is NOT NEEDED (and supported by Sam F and the carb challenge study performed by MNKD (take dose, eat nothing==> no hypo) 6. Lung irritation- 75% of the time? Not reported in trials, but I'll be generous and give it to you 7.Modified self dosing regimen- OK you have to b kidding on this one- elsewhere this was challenged as not making sense inhalation draw would have to be far in excess of what is required to pull in entire dose; any such games would make dosing inconsistent, which the FDA would have kiaboshed. so I think I gave you 2/7 here. "I think some people here need to look up confirmation bias: In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias (or confirmatory bias) is a tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions, leading to statistical errors." I also do not fight a preponderance of questionable data. Makes no logical sense to do so. I do question everything. Especially when there are those with motives and agendas (sure mine is obvious, but I look at the total data presented, including what does not jive with common sense). Debunking this review does not fall into a confirmation bias scenario, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 4, 2015 13:17:53 GMT -5
"All I'm saying is people are confusing the post ON the review, and the review itself. The review itself seems to be legit."
From what most people on this board know about the mechanisms and action of afrezza, the review seems to be bogus. If you keep a tally of positive / negative blog posts of people that have tried it, it's probably something like 30 to 2, or 30 to 1 if you discount this one as bogus, as I do.
Elaine Benice to the Soup Nazi..... NEEEEEXXXXT !!!
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Mar 4, 2015 10:19:57 GMT -5
Hi Savak, no knowledge of timeframe. It is an FDA scheduling of the 'key person' issue.
No, I do not know exactly that this is the case; however from other bio / pharma investments I had been involved with, there were always FDA inspections and scoring as to how well GMP compliance was prior to any approval / drug launch. In wireless / telecom, we run pre-IOT (Inter-Operability Testing) before going in front of an agency to do real IOT which requires scheduling the time; you want to be sure you will pass. A failure can cost tremendously in terms of trying to get back into the queue. I am drawing from observations of other investments and analogies in my industry that involve gov't agencies. Sorry I can not provide you with concrete :-)
|
|