Folks, “hooligan” Yoshka’s report from a much touted 2nd round of IR talks is a major hit & miss, and a major “rattlesnake”. Here are the 5 points...
1-Can Auryxia be marketed for IDA outside of CKD?...... Hahaha, irrelevant question. No sheet, FDA approval is to treat IDA in adults with CKD, not on dialysis. The original approval, is for control of serum phosphorus levels in patients with CKD who require dialysis. You see, folks, Auryxia offers continuity of care - you start the patient with Auryxia in early stages of renal disease (below normal to mild loss of kidney function) who do not require dialysis but with IDA presence, and continue Auryxia treatment thru every stage of CKD which includes IDA progression, hemoglobin progressively falling and phosphorous levels progressively rising, all the way to and thru dialysis treatment. As far Auryxia being marketed for IDA outside of CKD, dumb irrelevant question, not in the cards, why ask? However, just because it cannot be marketed/sold for IDA outside of CKD, doesn’t necessarily mean it won’t be prescribed for IDA outside of CKD - Keryx or any other pharma/bio pharma can’t control how every physician prescribes a drug. You see folks, IMO, the reason for “hooligan” Yoshka/gwells including the “question” AND placing it as # 1 in his report/post, is an attempt at giving a distorted and deceitful impression that Auryxia for IDA is not a “big thing” and sort of inconspicuously relating it to Auryxia sales being slow. Yosha/gwells is a very poor and ineffective “hooligan/charlatan”.
2-Why wasn't Keryx more prepared to launch Auryxia for hyperphosphetemia (apparently they only had 3 months to prepare)......Folks, this topic was set-up to be continued in “hooligan” Yoshka’s/gwells 1st report/post as follows, “They did not prepare properly for the launch” (take a look at the 1st report/post, it’s there.) Now, in the 2nd report/post comes the follow-up, let me explain. But first, let’s ask the following question which leads to the crux of the matter: At this juncture, why even address the topic of Auryxia launch for hyperphosphatemia, who cares, that was 31/2 years ago, what, they couldn’t react and rectify from poor preparation in 31/2 years? Ahaa, but here’s the catch from the follow-up in the 2nd report/post: “Her experience is that typically companies prepare for 18 months to launch a product. As I understood her, they were preparing almost 2 years for IDA launch”. So, what does 18 months and 2 years equate to? Yes, you figured it out, it equates to 31/2 years. Hahaha, IMO, trying to reconcile 31/2 years of poor performance/nothingburger sales with a “hooligan” Yoshka/gwells report/post on a public message board. You see, folks, potentially, so goes Fred’s hypothetical, developing groundwork (i.e. commercial infrastructure) and slow sales were part of “a plan” while Renvela finished it last 3 years of nearly billion sales/year before generics to hit the market.
3- If Auryxia is not going to be marketed in Europe, then why the European manufacturing agreements? Answer: Having European agreements is part of the EU approval process. The sites are also able to manufacture for the US. While Keryx will not go it alone in Europe, they would entertain partnering if it could be shown to be profitable......Yada yada yada, Auryxia WILL be launched in the EU market with Big Pharma, period, IMO, groundwork has been in development, and Big Pharma has the infrastructure in place. But, funny thing, 180 degree IR shift from 1st report/post, “There will be no effort to market Auryxia in Europe.” haha (Btw, the EU topic, as was the launch of Auryxia for hyperphosphatemia, topic # 2, just follow-ups of same topics from 1st round of talks. I thoughts 2nd round of talks was to include new topics, current shareholder issues and concerns such as zoominfo’s 226 job profiles a la Big Pharma organizational structure sitting in 27,300 sq. foot offices with multi-million renovations, while the company has delivered nothing but CRAPOLA and the stock price sits at $4. Priceless!
4-Given the poor price performance of the stock, why is Madison receiving what many of us perceive to be unwarranted bonuses?
Answer: Madison's compensation is not tied to the share price but rather to measurable company goals. Attaining the goals should typically be reflected in the stock performance but we agreed there are many factors that impact share price. Madison's goals are apparently laid out in last years proxy statement. (I'm guessing they are open to review by shareholders.)......Not even going to comment, speaks for itself, major “gangta” practices, imo. But again, set-up and follow-up just from 1st report/post as follows, “Madison has received bonuses tied to performance goals and has not for goals not achieved. Bonuses are not tied to pps” yeah yeah $&%#$&
and finally, from “hooligan” Yoshka’s/gwells high level bilateral 2nd round of talks with IR, comes Chanel #5..
5-Is Keryx open to a merger or acquisition? Answer: It would be considered if it made good business sense.....Well, we could have skipped all the bs mumbo jumbo and gone straight to Chanel #5. haha. But gotta love IR, “if it made good business sense”. What??? These exec bad “clowns” are sitting in a 27,300 sq. foot office with multi-million renovations, dancing to the beat of hefty compensation “Scam artists. CEO, CFO all the way the F down to the fat janitor!” (credit to poster Gilmore Happy), delivering nothing but CRAPOLA, spending like drunken salilors, in the RED for years and up the ying yang, stockholders value at $4/shares after 31/2 years and 2 FDA aporovals, and IR has the temerity of saying, “if it made good business sense”??? LOLOL
Poor “hooligan” Yoshka/gwells, his rubber raft is full of holes, and so is his head.
All, in my opinion, as always..
