|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 17:27:46 GMT -5
That's impressive the one message with 12k views. I think that is rather rare that social media posts get that many views. Most of the posts from Afrezza users I see are doing really good to break 100 views/likes/shares or whatever.
Found the line about "This isn't a promotion for Afrezza. However... " kinda interesting. It was quite positive about Afrezza for someone not doing promotion of it. Wonder what they would have said if it were promotion.
As for the basic question this poses, I think we've learned now from several years of great social media posts about Afrezza that it does not substitute for traditional advertising. Pharmaceuticals simply don't have much potential for "viral" interest.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 16:45:23 GMT -5
Anyone know if Russians can vote? I was talking to some Russians today about "adoption", and let's just say I wouldn't be surprised to see some of Mike's emails leaked soon... could shake up the whole vote
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 16:01:38 GMT -5
zuegirdor... to some extent they are doing what you suggest. It seems that people such as Joey are getting free Afrezza for some period of time. But apparently there are limitations to how many vouchers MNKD will give to someone, since we've also seen members post that they can't get access to Afrezza. I think they've moved away from "free samples" to the voucher program, probably for numerous reasons... which might include things like doctors not wanting to take up valued refrigerator space, wanting free scripts to count as scripts in Symphony numbers and wanting to get patients into MNKD database. I agree that it's better to give Afrezza away vs having it expire. But free probably isn't going to convince reluctant doctors to prescribe and free doesn't mean a patient can start using Afrezza without a prescription.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 15:11:14 GMT -5
Maybe (hopefully) the one time update is July and not January? All of those 4 big ones that I looked up have new formularies for January. At least one of the 4 did seem to have some mid year update.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 14:50:46 GMT -5
Well, I seem to remember that back in the first half of the year when they spoke about January 2018 Medicare coverage, part of the context for that statement was that many Medicare plans are only updated once a year (this is from memory, not looking up a transcript, so grain of salt). Countering that I did find one Medicare formulary in my short investigation that had an effective date of July 2017, so there appear to be some that update mid year. It may also be possible that some make exceptions and add drugs even when there isn't a complete new formulary release.
I too am working with the assumption that MNKD management is all over this. Just trying to set my expectations right with regard to when we might actually see results.
An open question in my mind is how much of a problem deals with competing prandials plays into whether Afrezza would be added. Management stated that a different category/bucket would have made a difference, though I've heard some arguments that even a different "category" (adjective) wouldn't have really assured coverage. As we know, we didn't get a different "category" (adjective) from FDA.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 14:26:55 GMT -5
I merely report what I find. I was wishing it would have been something different. I was beginning to assume the reason people are not discussing Medicare formulary additions isn't because others haven't looked, but probably because what they found they didn't think would be well received on PB. So I figured it might as well be me to be the bearer of bad news... that way anyone that wants to ignore it can simply chalk it up to me being evil. It would be great if this thread turned into a list of people pointing out 2018 Medicare formularies where Afrezza has been added... I don't have the time to check hundreds of them myself. Does anyone know how to get 2018 formulary info from formularylookup.com or some similar database?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 13:55:52 GMT -5
Comments from management much earlier in the year had led me to believe that starting Jan 2018 there would be significant new Medicare coverage coming online.
I just went through a bit of a spot exercise looking at the largest 4 Medicare insurers based on number of lives covered as listed by formularylookup.com. Here is what they are currently listed as, which I believe is for 2017 plans.
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. 82 plans 100% Not Covered Humana, Inc. 59 plans 95% Not Covered CVS Caremark RX 5 plans 91% Not Covered Aetna, Inc. 90 plans 100% Not Covered
I did a search for 2018 formularies for these four. From what I found it appears that their main Medicare formularies starting January still do not cover Afrezza at all.
I'm beginning to think that we really don't have any significant change to Medicare coverage that will start in January. I'd be very happy if someone has some evidence to the contrary.
It does seem that more recent comments from management have been about discussions occurring in 2018, and not so much implying there are any done deals waiting to kick in.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 5, 2017 13:03:47 GMT -5
Investors that put money into MNKD without taking shares in return... interesting concept. In case there is any confusion, I was quoting from Mannkind's press release. Mannkind can dream, can't it? Just like the rest of us. I'm hoping that dreaming isn't a large part of Mike's planning process. I believe Mike is a savvy player, so I'm guessing it is more spinning than dreaming when he talks about non-dilutive. I'm adjusting my expectations to now include much more dilution. It'll be a slow and expensive process to get to profitability.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 4, 2017 23:56:26 GMT -5
babaoriley ... call me old fashioned, but I use the term "investor" to mean someone that owns shares of a company. Just odd wording in my opinion. I don't read much into it. Assuming trials can show clinical superiority to RAAs, which most of us firmly believe, SNY certainly could have had a big success. Should have been a warning sign that they didn't immediately initiate such trials. In one way, Mike C and co. are doing investors a favor by requesting the 140M authorized shares. 2018 is the year that will make or break MNKD. With superiority results on tap, an expanding advertising campaign, and (hopefully) improved insurance coverage in the coming months, this will be MNKD's best chance at realizing its potential. The company will need all the help it can get, notably from the 140M authorized shares. If these major milestones don't materialize (especially the superiority results, IMO), MNKD will have essentially be done (at least for a while). It would be a shame if funding was the factor that hindered or impeded MNKD's vision to disrupt diabetes treatment. Yes, 140M shares is a lot, but management and the BOD must surely realize, with all that is about to materialize in the next year, it's better to be safe than sorry. In other words, 2018 is MNKD's make-or-break year. The can's been kicked down the road long enough, and we'll see soon enough exactly what cards they're really holding. If this huge potential dilution overhang impacts the share price, and I think it already has, it may be counterproductive rather than helpful... actually reducing the ability of the company raising the money you correctly recognize they need. The onus will be on management to show some results to reassure the street that we aren't in for a visit from the ghost of dilutions past. Some dilution may be necessary... in fact I think it is inevitable. 50% dilution I certainly would consider any form of gift since it is basically taking assets away from existing shareholders.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 4, 2017 19:22:05 GMT -5
babaoriley... call me old fashioned, but I use the term "investor" to mean someone that owns shares of a company. Just odd wording in my opinion. I don't read much into it. Assuming trials can show clinical superiority to RAAs, which most of us firmly believe, SNY certainly could have had a big success. Should have been a warning sign that they didn't immediately initiate such trials.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 4, 2017 17:05:43 GMT -5
In one of his recent articles, Spencer wrote: "If the company is working on some form of deal to raise capital, the best time to announce it is in conjunction with the vote results (or at least within 48 hours). In my opinion, it is best for MannKind if it can work a deal that will avoid needing to renegotiate with Deerfield again. If such a deal is not on the table, there could be some choppy waters ahead." Focusing on the first part of that statement, I think that makes sense. Maybe Locust Walk finally came through and found a potential strategic big investor? And Mannkind needs the new shares for that? files.shareholder.com/downloads/AMDA-22AIJ9/5491906434x0x945470/C13930F3-0B10-4987-B51D-61EFD9922A41/MNKD_News_2017_6_5_General_Releases.pdf"Continuing MannKind's strong desire to help patients, Locust Walk will seek strategic partners and investors to non-dilutively advance the development of Technosphere-based therapies ..." Wait and see, I guess. Investors that put money into MNKD without taking shares in return... interesting concept.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 3, 2017 17:56:44 GMT -5
Starting this for input on how this could aid Afrezza as we know CVS does cover. I wouldn't expect they would rush into any changes to the way formularies are created. Aetna and CVS have worked together on PBM for some years now I believe. It seems Aetna retained decisions about formulary inclusion rather than having CVS do that... at least that is what I gather from reading coverage about their PBM partnership.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 1, 2017 18:11:20 GMT -5
I triple checked these numbers so I know it is correct. Loan rate increased from 24% to 27.5% today. Quadruple checked, since I just did as well... rate that is paid by Schwab. I have shares in three Schwab accounts, they returned shares for two of them and those have not yet been taken again. I may contact them Monday to try to convince them to grab those.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 1, 2017 17:38:01 GMT -5
This is not the same company as a year ago. After the vote is approved we will be on the road to prosperity, leaving what’s left of the short thesis behind. At 3.25 conversion the play is not to short for pennies but to hold for dollars. January can’t get here soon enough 😊 I guess you'll be surprised that the shorts will still have a thesis... that there is going to be significant dilution coming with 140M new shares hitting the market. A short thesis doesn't ultimately have to come to fruition for it to yield a successful short trade. Authorization of shares doesn't magically make money available. No company would ever go bankrupt if all they had to do was authorize countless extra shares and rake in unlimited money at whatever share price they are trading at before the authorization. MNKD needs some new authorization of shares (the number that would be necessary being highly disputed), but that is simply a necessity and very small step. There is no guarantee that the share price will be $3.25 or higher. That conversion price doesn't have some magical power to control the share price, and Deerfield, as any savvy actor, is not going to convert at a price higher than the shares are currently trading. I predict that Deerfield will convert, but I think there is as much chance it is a renegotiated deal at a value less than $3.25 with a discount to the trading price. Also suspect, based on Deerfield MO, they would hedge and lock in profit from discount having no interest in either a net long or short position in MNKD. Not risking whether price goes to pennies or dollars.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 1, 2017 17:20:21 GMT -5
Well I guess that shows they aren't acting on behalf of Mannkind. Activist investor or simply opportunist taking advantage of shareholders... smells more the latter.
|
|