|
Post by compound26 on Jan 25, 2018 16:32:30 GMT -5
Today was so much fun...let's do it again tomorrow, eh? Here is my thought. Based on what occurred in October, the price will probably consolidate a bit tomorrow. Then during sometime next week, there will another leg up with good volume with a one-day increase of $1 or more. Today's price action in many ways is reminiscent of what occurred on October 5, 2017, which, by the way is also a Thursday. We know what followed. mnkd.proboards.com/post/124389Nasdaq real time volume today, 49,879,664 shares. $4.95 up $1.41. up 39.83%www.nasdaq.com/symbol/mnkd/real-timeThe golden cross will happen tomorrow. stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=MNKD&p=D&b=5&g=0&id=p43042944282 this chart showing the Nasdaq summary volume on the day, 73.7 million. Compare it with today's (January 25, 2018) price action and volume. mnkd.proboards.com/post/136631MNKD Nasdaq real time volume today, 27,070,893 shares. $3.7975*. + 1.1075. +41.17%. MNKD Nasdaq summary volume. 38,053,716 shares. www.nasdaq.com/symbol/mnkdshare volume fell off after Europes close. one more thing, usually a Wolfe wave is a change of trend. Just sayin. for instance when the s and p hit 666 in 2009, it came off the bottom with a Wolfe wave.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 23, 2018 17:26:21 GMT -5
It is not that someone is trying to keep it at $2.50. IMHO, because there is no news, I think the longs and shorts are kindly finding a balance at around $2.50. There will be some movement next week once Mike speaks at the Noble14 conference.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 17, 2018 18:17:56 GMT -5
If they took the shares, or the cash we hear nothing, if we renegotiated we hear something. Is the way I understand it ... That's true. However, since we are trading at $2.5, there is no reason for Deerfield to take the shares at $3.25. Therefore, most likely Mannkind paid the $10 million to settle the debt.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 16, 2018 15:15:44 GMT -5
Noble also issues analyst report on biotech companies. See below: /NOBLE Capital Markets research reports update October 12-20, 2017 $CRBP - Positive Top-line Phase II Data for Anabasum in Dermatomyositis $TXMD - Assumption of Coverage with BUY Rating and $9 Price Target $GPL - Production results similar to the last quarter and our expectations $ASM - Marketing trip highlights growth initiatives $AVXL - Anavex2-73 Phase 2 PK/PD Data Shows Dose-Response Effects in Measures of Cognitive Function $AGRX - Assumption of Coverage with Buy Rating and $15 Price Target lnkd.in/g4W_N2Y
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 16, 2018 14:41:09 GMT -5
Thanks Compound. That's a great post. I am not so arrogant to think I know better than Mike C. but I sure am tired of waiting. I think he's doing a good job, especially given the situation. I guess I just HOPE (there's that word again) he has carefully considered, researched and consulted regarding the Sales Volume response to a significant price cut. And I am again very disappointed that it's January 15th and not a freakin word about the Deerfield payment. That angers me a lot and I think that's not unreasonable. My spider sense says we all are going to take in the shorts again with regard to Deerfield. alethea Thanks. I share with your frustration. It has been tough road to travel for Mannkind (and its shareholders ) over the last several years. With respect to the $10 million due to Deerfield on Jan. 15, I think the $10 million has been paid by Mannkind. Since it is not a news (just a payment of debt based on previously negotated and agreed upon timeline), no PR is needed. And if that is the case, I am totally fine with that. See my previous post on this. mnkd.proboards.com/post/135630
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 16, 2018 14:16:23 GMT -5
Althea, you have much more experience with buying Afrezza than I do, but why is $1600/month being talked about? Earlier in this thread, we were talking about a price of $1600/script, and the high price of the script being from more people moving to 3-month scriptswww.goodrx.com/afrezza shows the "large" pack of 60 8u and 30 12u under $700 with coupon, and the "smaller pack" of 60 4u and 30 8u at ~$350 www.goodrx.com/novolog with 5 flexpens at about $550. I'm not sure which is a good comparison Insurance companies probably pay less. I took $1,600 from suegirdor's (zue??) post. Her son uses Afrezza I think. I'm not sure but her young son is a Type 1 if I recall correctly? And he's probably eating like "normal" people his age which means lots and lots of carbs. The more carbs you eat, the more insulin you need. I PERSONALLY paid $485 for my last box which contained only 90 cartridges. 30 4's and 60 8's. And I use Afrezza only sporadically because of its high cost. I am a quite insulin resistant T2. I would need three boxes per month to even begin to even try to eat the carbs a nondiabetic does. Hence 3 boxes at $485 each would be $1,455 for me at that level of use. $1,455 is pretty close to Sue's figure of $1,600. Type 2's generally require much, much more insulin than Type 1's. Even our most famous T1, Sam AfrezzaUser Finta uses a whole bunch of insulin, AT LEAST two boxes per month and maybe more I think. Each diabetic is different, especially T2's. Spiro seems to be getting wonderful results using Afrezza but keep in mind he is a relatively recently developed diabetic. Me, I've had it for nearly 20 years. I am a typical older, "stale" diabetic who requires big, big amounts of insulin to counter carbs. I can't prove it nor am I inclined to try, but I believe strongly that Afrezza is priced way too high to ever catch on "en masse" with Type 2's at its current price. Ironically and coincidentally I am waiting to get my first Afrezza since my new Obamacare insurance effective this month, January. I called MannKindCares and they helped with Prior Authorization which is terrific. My new insurance covers Afrezza, not sure what Tier, but my first order (which is TWO boxes, 180 cartridges) is supposed to be FREE. Hip, hip Hooray. Kudos MNKD. Thank you! BUT, after that, until my deductible is achieved, my new cost will be $418 per box if I've got it correctly. So even with my new insurance, two boxes per month would/will cost me over $900. And even two boxes monthly is not enough for me to eat carbs like a nondiabetic. Anyway, don't want to get too verbose and make this post way too long. I hope that somewhat answers your question. alethea I think Mike is taking the pricing issue with a two-prong approach as outlined below. As you can see, it is not that Mike is not aware of the pricing issue, it is just that it is not easy to fix the pricing issue. If Mike just cut the retail price by 50% or even 75%, it may not be the best approach. (What if Mike cuts Afrezza price by 75% and the overall insurance coverage and prescription only increased modestly? Say if our TRx increased to 750 within three months due to lower Afrezza retail price (that's a 50% increase, not bad at all). However, because Afrezza price is reduced by 75%, our per script sales will be only 25% of current level. Therefore our total weekly sales will be around $225,000. If this will be the case, where our PPS will be?) For anyone with (relatively acceptable) insurance coverage, retail price of Afrezza is not an issue to the consumer as the consumer is paying the co-pay. For insurance companies, lower price of a drug does not necessarily translate into better coverage. Here is what Mike stated on this subject: On the PBM side, with CVS and Express Scripts, you've got to remember two things about them. They make money off the higher-volume drugs. And they make money off drugs that increase prices frequently. Because as a PBM, they get an administration fee. If you're making 5% off of a $100 versus 5% off $500, which drug would you rather have on formulary -- the one that's going to give $25, not $5, right? So then if you're getting $25 a year, and the price is going to go up, you're going to get a raise of 20% a year, that gives you a $5 raise every single year. You don't have to do anything, other than block competition. So today, our competition says in order to get our discount, you need to block every drug in the class, including Afrezza, and every patient must fail our drug to get to Afrezza, in order to get our rebates. So that's what happens. Novo Nordisk (NYSE:NVO) basically blocks patient access to our product. And so, if you're CVS, and you want those rebates, and you want that admin fee, and you don't want to do any work, the easier thing to do is just to say, "Sorry, I'm doing good cost of care, because Novo is giving me all these rebates for blocking everybody." And then if you say, "Well, add us to the formulary," they say, "You don't have any market share." Then we say, "We don't have any market share, because you block everything!" So how can I get market share? It's a circular argument. This is how they protect their monopoly. This is why you have all these lawsuits going on with insulin. www.fool.com/investing/2017/11/21/mannkind-ceo-michael-castagna-on-whats-ahead-for-t.aspxFor anyone without (or with poor) insurance coverage, retail price is probably too high at this moment. However, I believe Mike is working on this and his plan to solve this will be the membership subscription service through One Drop. And I believe, once this model is kicked off, a few of the people with relatively acceptable insurance coverage may elect to pay cash if their insurance coverage is not ideal or too cumbersome to get Afrezza through their insurance. Here is what Mike stated on this: One Drop partnership Castagna: We look to One Drop -- they've done a phenomenal job of building a patient-focused platform around self-directed care. So one of the things they have is an unlimited test strip membership model for $30 a month. And so we're looking to bolt on to their platform an insulin membership model. There's around $300 million in cash sales in this country where people are paying three to five hundred dollars a month for insulin. And so we look at that as a significant opportunity to help some of the people offset some of the high costs of insulin. S o it's very different business model and taking a little bit longer to get off the ground, because no one's ever done this in the pharmaceutical industry for a prescription-based product. So a lot more lawyers and pharmacy things we have to work through, but we're coming very close to getting that together and that'll be exciting to see. But that collaboration remains strong, and the people there are great. And so we'll continue to see how we integrate technology into coaching as well as getting better customer service to your doorstep on your prescription drugs. Speights: Any idea how far in the future it will be before you get benefits? Castagna: This is one where we don't know if it will take off right away. We know there's a large need. We don't know how price-sensitive people are going to be. So we're going to get it out the door, and we'll be prepared for a really good success. We'll be prepared for really low. But I think it's something that's scalable, so if it takes off faster than we think we can easily add more customer service people and things like that. So we watch this in a couple of categories like weight loss and others and we think, you know, it could be very interesting. So we'll continue to watch it. But this one has a very self-directed aspect to it. www.fool.com/investing/2017/11/21/mannkind-ceo-michael-castagna-on-whats-ahead-for-t.aspx
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 16, 2018 13:49:47 GMT -5
Personally I will be happy with either the note 1.) being pushed back for another quarter, or 2.) Mnkd paying the $10m. Obviously if the note is pushed back, then no harm/no foul. If mnkd pays the $10m, while shorts may see this as a lack of confidence by Deerfield and therefore say it is a negative event, I see it as a positive event and sign of strength by mnkd that they believe they are on the right path moving forward and have hence refused to lower the price and renegotiate the buy-out terms (which is the third and least favorable option in my opinion.) Paying Deerfield the $10m really should be no burden on cash as mnkd is mostly out of cash regardless by end of March or so and they can just add another $10m to the cash raise we all know is coming. GLTAL's!!!! Based on the fact that it is Jan. 16 today and Mannkind has not issued a PR on this (even though they did issue a PR today informing us that Mannkind will present in the NobleCon14 conference), I am assuming that Mannkind just paid the $10 million. Since the payment of the $10 million is just regular course business transaction, Mannkind does not need to issue a PR. If the above is true, I am good with that. That will mean that: (a) Mannkind is not willing to give Deerfield further discount of their previously agreed-upon $3.25 conversion price; and (b) Mannkind is pretty confident that they will be able to raise additional funds at a price higher than the current PPS in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 16, 2018 13:37:56 GMT -5
It is possible that this firm may help arrange the financing for Mannkind down the road. I am not sure whether this is one of the smallest investment banks as digger's post noted. I do note that the size of the financing arranged by this firm does seem to be the type of financing Mannkind is seeking or getting. The last several financing the firm arranged are in the following amount: $250 million $55 million $72 million $197 million noblecapitalmarkets.com/transactions
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 11, 2018 10:59:53 GMT -5
Well, we have quite the range of predictions. Here is what we have so far. I will keep the predictions open until the end of January, when it will be closed for adds, edits and other changes you may want to make. Right now, as it stands we have the low end 34,758 and we have the high end 116,428. Hellodolly-34,458 Casual Investor - 45,000-61,000 parrerob - 48,517 Compound26 - 78,000-104,000 52,000 figglebird - 108,688 tchalaa - 113,100 Clement - 116,428 I've read all the posts so far and I haven't had the chance to reply to them but I encourage everyone to participate. Based on today's information and what we now, what MNKD has released, what Mike has tweeted and said in many taped interviews, studies in progress, studies released, etc. your own DD and time as a MNKD investor...gives most of you enough to participate and have a little fun. I promise you, as we get closer to the end of thisyear, this could get pretty funny, too. Don't be fearful of putting your hard earned online and anonymous reputation on the line by playing. As a side, I appreciate the revenue projections being put out there. hellodolly My prediction of annual TRx for 2018 is 52,000
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 11, 2018 10:52:58 GMT -5
466 (NRx 256 ; refill 210) $582,000
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 10, 2018 19:08:06 GMT -5
...WAG and DBw2BF- OK, I will take a stab at this: Wild Arse Guess, that one is well known. I can not figure the other one, except maybe the ending , to Be Frank... ?? Nope...any other guesses? What A Guess? Drinking Beer! Work? To be Finished.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 10, 2018 11:42:00 GMT -5
My modest forecast is for 2-3% week over week growth, which takes us from 500 TRx to 1400-2200 TRx by the end of the year. At $1400 per TRx gross (see below for why), that plays out to: Total TRx: 45,000 - 61,000 Ending Week 2018 TRx: 1400 - 2200 Ending Week 2018 Sales: $2M - $3M Note that by various metrics (scripts, units and quarterly calls) we have had slightly better than 2% week over week growth (aka 26% quarterly growth) in 2017, which is why I call this a modest forecast. Forecasting scripts is tough, because new patient NRx is only 1-month, and most long term users are 3-month. So, for example, when we get 100 new-patient NRx's, 100% retention will only translate into 33 long term patient scripts. Sorry if I repeat this a lot , but it needs to be said a lot to push back against people saying our retention % is in the teens. Forecasting $$ is tough, because the price increase muddies our history. Now that's done with, I think $$/script will still continue to rise as people transition from new-patient to long term patient. This will continue until refills are much larger than NRx. I didn't include it above, but I see the long term $$/script stabilizing at $1300-$1800, to reflect the 3-month GoodRX price with coupon ($350 - $700 per month, depending on # of units). I just don't think we will get that 1 big thing that will make scripts skyrocket. So it will be a slog: telling people how well this product works, then getting patients and prescribers trained up on how to make it works. casualinvestor agree with your reasoning and predictions. My numbers are very close to yours. I am thinking we will be doing 1,500-2,000 weekly TRx, with an average per script sales around $1,500. That will translate into $2.25-3 M per week in terms of retails sales. Assuming a 50% ratio between net revenue and retail sale, that will translate into $60-75 M annual net revenue by EOY 2018. My prediction of annual TRx for 2018 is 52,000.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 4, 2018 13:34:44 GMT -5
Oddly enough, during the 2016 holiday season, the TRx didn't drop until the week of New Years Day.
Last year:
WkEnding 12/23/16 TRx = 271 WkEnding 12/30/16 TRx = 294 WkEnding 1/6/17 TRx = 238
Christmas & New Year's Day fell on Sundays in 2016.
487
Yes, mnholdem @investersam If you look at the data from both 2015 and 2016, you will see that there is a pretty significant bump in refills during the last week of the year. The refills bump to a large extent cancels whatever reduction in NRx during that week. In 2015, the refills increased by 42% and in 2016, the refills increased by 24%. To me, that kind of making sense. For some reason, people want to have their refills used before year end. (Maybe because some of them switched insurance that will take effect as of 1 January of the new year?) For 2017, the Christmas week ends on Dec. 29, with Dec. 30 and Dec. 31 being in the weekend. That is pretty much the same as the year 2016, where the Christmas week ended on Dec. 30, with Dec. 31 being in the weekend. The year of 2015 is quite different. In 2015, the Christmas week ended on Dec. 25. So my point is that, in 2015, the Christmas week sales did not benefit from the refill bump that occurs in the last week of the year. On the other hand, in 2016, the Christmas week sales did benefit from the refill bump that occurs in the last week of the year. I predict that, in 2017, the Christmas week sales will once again benefit from the refill bump that occurs in the last week of the year.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 4, 2018 10:57:24 GMT -5
My prediction: TRx 504 (NRx 248 + Refills 256) Total sales $650,000
Will be thrilled if the TRx turns out to be 550 (NRx 275 + Refills 275) or above; Total sales $700,000 or above. That will mean Mannkind ended 2017 with a bang!
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jan 3, 2018 19:06:18 GMT -5
Something to think about:
Sanofi started marketing Afrezza right around January/February 2015. It ended its partnership with Mannkind in less than a year on January 4, 2016. Its high water weekly sales of Afrezza is $371,000.
Mannkind (with its in-house representatives, not the third-party representatives it used in the summary of 2016) started marketing Afrezza right around February 2017. As of today, January 3, 2018, it has marketed Afrezza less than one year. Its high water weekly sales of Afrezza so far is $647,000, which is about 175% of the high water sales of Sanofi.
So, little Mannkind, with about 1/7 of the financial resource (as Mike stated it), and probably 1/5 to 1/4 of the human resource (in terms of reps promoting Afrezza), in the same length of time, is doing 175% of the sales of the almighty Sanofi.
What do you think? If you are Sanofi, what will you think?
|
|