|
Post by mango on May 17, 2019 2:29:15 GMT -5
I've been guilty of attacking and judging MannKind Executive Management's compensation before, and I am here to say that I regret doing so. This post may not align with some folks on here, but I am fully aware that what I am writing is the result of much dissecting of information and logical thinking, and is not directed towards any one particular person on this board. I have long suspected Michael Kovacy's to be a flake, but I have avoided discussions about him and his agendas out of respect for others. I personally think Michael Kovacy does not give a shit about shareholders, and has effectively caused division amongst shareholders and Executive Management and the Board. After months of confusion, flip-flopping over this whole thing, I have concluded post revelation that Michael Kovacy is a bad actor. This post isn't solely meant for expressing my thinking on Michael Kovacy, but I needed to get that out there, and do truly hope that everyone will logically think and trust theirselves. There are no coincidences. Michael Kovacy gave rise to chaos during a time when there should be celebration. I invested in MannKind right before Al Mann died and Company was at its worse. It was not long ago when Mike Castagna blindly trusted and respected me enough to show me the man he is. At the time, I had been in an argument with Derek LeRoith MD, PhD, who is currently a member of the MannKind Scientific Advisor Board. Derek was/is the Chief Editor of a major medical journal, and I had contacted him concerning a publication that contained incorrect and inaccurate information that was indirectly negative towards Afrezza. After numerous email exchanges I decided to inform Mike Castagna of the issue—with full certainty that nothing positive would come of it, much less a favorable response. The result? Mike went and had lunch with the man that same week and now he is on the MannKind Scientific Advisor Board. Mike made that happen, and he is the only person that could have made it happen because that is what happened. That's just one example I personally experienced that showed me how great a person Mike Castagna is. Every single MannKind Executive has a salary less than the total compensation of the former CEO of ADA. When I put personal beliefs aside and use logical thinking, I see nothing wrong with Prop 2. It's not what I personally am aligned with, but then again, I don't worship money and have come realize that Mike Castagna is right that the Company has to use it as leverage to gain and retain industry talent. Afterall, the CEO of MannKind had a lesser salary than the total compensation of the CEO of ADA. But, that's just mytakeonit • MannKind Executive MannKind Compensation: 2016-2018• American Diabetes Association Highest Compensated Employees: 2017An activist doesn't attempt to persuade and/or manipulate someone into doing something or thinking a certain way. That's all I see coming from Michael Kovacy and others.
|
|
|
Post by flipflop88 on May 17, 2019 2:33:01 GMT -5
If they used their own money, yes, absolutely. Not if they just gift themselves stock options at bargain basement prices. You too can buy today, at the same price they will pay when exercised. You too will have to use your own money. You will have freedom to sell that they will not. Speaking of which, excuse me while I put in a buy order. This is definitely not the same. They can just wait, if the PPS depreciate, they don't exercise, if it appreciates, they exercice. No risk of downside, only potential upside. When as a shareholder you buy straight at 1.30, you are exposed to the stock dropping significantly still.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 2:52:59 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by awesomo on May 17, 2019 2:52:59 GMT -5
Every single MannKind Executive has a salary less than the total compensation of the former CEO of ADA. When I put personal beliefs aside and use logical thinking, I see nothing wrong with Prop 2. It's not what I personally am aligned with, but then again, I don't worship money and have come realize that Mike Castagna is right that the Company has to use it as leverage to gain and retain industry talent. Afterall, the CEO of MannKind had a lesser salary than the total compensation of the CEO of ADA. You either compare the salaries of MannKind executives to the salaries of ADA executives (not sure why you’re doing this anyways, ADA is a non-profit, not a company), or you compare total compensation for both. MannKind executives receive much higher salaries and total compensation than ADA executives. You can’t compare salaries to total compensation.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 2:54:32 GMT -5
Post by mango on May 17, 2019 2:54:32 GMT -5
Every single MannKind Executive has a salary less than the total compensation of the former CEO of ADA. When I put personal beliefs aside and use logical thinking, I see nothing wrong with Prop 2. It's not what I personally am aligned with, but then again, I don't worship money and have come realize that Mike Castagna is right that the Company has to use it as leverage to gain and retain industry talent. Afterall, the CEO of MannKind had a lesser salary than the total compensation of the CEO of ADA. You either compare the salaries of MannKind executives to the salaries of ADA executives (not sure why you’re doing this anyways, ADA is a non-profit, not a company), or you compare total compensation for both. MannKind executives receive much higher salaries and total compensation than ADA executives. You can’t compare salaries to total compensation. Are you making the rules now? 🤣😔
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 2:56:23 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by awesomo on May 17, 2019 2:56:23 GMT -5
You either compare the salaries of MannKind executives to the salaries of ADA executives (not sure why you’re doing this anyways, ADA is a non-profit, not a company), or you compare total compensation for both. MannKind executives receive much higher salaries and total compensation than ADA executives. You can’t compare salaries to total compensation. Are you making the rules now? 🤣😔 Clearly logic escapes you if you think you made a good argument.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 2:58:00 GMT -5
Post by mango on May 17, 2019 2:58:00 GMT -5
Are you making the rules now? 🤣😔 Clearly logic escapes you if you think you made a good argument. Why are you diverting from my question? 😂
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 3:00:05 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by awesomo on May 17, 2019 3:00:05 GMT -5
Clearly logic escapes you if you think you made a good argument. Why are you diverting from my question? 😂 If you think you can compare apples & oranges, go right ahead and look extremely foolish.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 3:03:55 GMT -5
Post by mango on May 17, 2019 3:03:55 GMT -5
Why are you diverting from my question? 😂 If you think you can compare apples & oranges, go right ahead and look extremely foolish. You're still diverting.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 5:33:32 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by boytroy88 on May 17, 2019 5:33:32 GMT -5
You too can buy today, at the same price they will pay when exercised. You too will have to use your own money. You will have freedom to sell that they will not. Speaking of which, excuse me while I put in a buy order. This is definitely not the same. They can just wait, if the PPS depreciate, they don't exercise, if it appreciates, they exercice. No risk of downside, only potential upside. When as a shareholder you buy straight at 1.30, you are exposed to the stock dropping significantly still. But once they exercised those options then they are then exposed to any downswings along with the restrictions of a vesting period, no?
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 6:09:35 GMT -5
Post by ktim on May 17, 2019 6:09:35 GMT -5
I guess you don't see how taking something of value for free from the company isn't exactly addressing the concern many have. Taking options in lieu of salary increase would have been much more palatable. Taking raises and large stock option grants under these circumstances isn't something to be "grown out of". It is valid complaint. It may be forgotten with time, but we're not childlike for feeling betrayed as our shares are diluted and theirs are increased... on top of raises. When acquired they will need to pay the same price you would pay today. The primary difference is you may sell the shares you buy, they will be required to hold them for a period of time. If the shares are vested when exercised, there are no holding periods for the stock. They could sell immediately. There is no circumstance where they would have to risk their money and then be obligated to hold. Options themselves have a value as they allow someone to capture the stock appreciation and claims on future profits (taken from us existing shareholders) without the risk of buying the stock when there are no profits. If I wanted that I'd have to buy the options. If 10 year at the money options were available they would be very expensive if one wished to buy them. So the primary difference is I'd have to buy these valuable ways of capturing potential appreciation whereas management is given them free, able to capture appreciation value with absolutely no expenditure of their own capital or taking of risk. They aren't as nasty as warrants, but they are locking in dilution at low prices while providing no money now when it is desperately needed. Extrapolating between last prices for 1.00 and 1.50 Jan 2021 options it appears the value of at the money Jan 2021 calls would be approximately $0.83 now. LEAPS good for ten years obviously would be considerably more valuable. That is being given away. It's fine you're thrilled that this extra compensation is being provided to management when performance metrics seem so lousy and right after a raise. However, it is very normal for shareholders to take exception to it. And if we have any under age investors here, I'd say they're quite savvy for their age if upset with this and unlikely to become naive with more experience in life.
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on May 17, 2019 6:11:11 GMT -5
You too can buy today, at the same price they will pay when exercised. You too will have to use your own money. You will have freedom to sell that they will not. Speaking of which, excuse me while I put in a buy order. This is definitely not the same. They can just wait, if the PPS depreciate, they don't exercise, if it appreciates, they exercice. No risk of downside, only potential upside. When as a shareholder you buy straight at 1.30, you are exposed to the stock dropping significantly still. ...and that's how you are rewarded as an employee who works for MNKD, ABBV, ABT, AMGN, BMO, BP, CB, CSCO, EMR, GIS, HON, INTC, JNJ, JPM, KMB, KMI, KO, LEG, LMT, MCD, MRK, MSFT, MTB, NSC, NUE, PFE, PG, PNC, PPL, QCOM, SLB, T, WFC, WM, WMT, WPC, XOM, AMD, CEF, GE, GSK, INO, BG, CPB, EBAY, KTOS, MOS, MU, NOK, NVS, ORAN, SNY, SYNA, TACO, TER, TTEK, VOD, WEN, ALC, ASLEF, CLOEF, DSTZF, FPAFY, GRCLF, GUZOF, IMBBY, MARZF, PRGAF, RBGLY, PARQF, and TBVPF. Not everyone of these companies I own are flush with cash, have low P/E's, carry no levels of risk, have low BETA's, have no exposure to macro-global events, or make a profit every quarter or year...yet. But, I can tell you that at one point or another, the C-Suite employees of these same listed companies are compensated just like MNKD employees. As an employee of a company you can be awarded shares. As a non-employee, you are not awarded shares. That's how it works. While the risk is much different, it's designed to be. No, these are not ETFS or Mutual Funds. I out right have stock in every single one of these.
|
|
|
Post by ktim on May 17, 2019 6:28:00 GMT -5
I've been guilty of attacking and judging MannKind Executive Management's compensation before, and I am here to say that I regret doing so. This post may not align with some folks on here, but I am fully aware that what I am writing is the result of much dissecting of information and logical thinking, and is not directed towards any one particular person on this board. I have long suspected Michael Kovacy's to be a flake, but I have avoided discussions about him and his agendas out of respect for others. I personally think Michael Kovacy does not give a shit about shareholders, and has effectively caused division amongst shareholders and Executive Management and the Board. After months of confusion, flip-flopping over this whole thing, I have concluded post revelation that Michael Kovacy is a bad actor. This post isn't solely meant for expressing my thinking on Michael Kovacy, but I needed to get that out there, and do truly hope that everyone will logically think and trust theirselves. There are no coincidences. Michael Kovacy gave rise to chaos during a time when there should be celebration. I invested in MannKind right before Al Mann died and Company was at its worse. It was not long ago when Mike Castagna blindly trusted and respected me enough to show me the man he is. At the time, I had been in an argument with Derek LeRoith MD, PhD, who is currently a member of the MannKind Scientific Advisor Board. Derek was/is the Chief Editor of a major medical journal, and I had contacted him concerning a publication that contained incorrect and inaccurate information that was indirectly negative towards Afrezza. After numerous email exchanges I decided to inform Mike Castagna of the issue—with full certainty that nothing positive would come of it, much less a favorable response. The result? Mike went and had lunch with the man that same week and now he is on the MannKind Scientific Advisor Board. Mike made that happen, and he is the only person that could have made it happen because that is what happened. That's just one example I personally experienced that showed me how great a person Mike Castagna is. Every single MannKind Executive has a salary less than the total compensation of the former CEO of ADA. When I put personal beliefs aside and use logical thinking, I see nothing wrong with Prop 2. It's not what I personally am aligned with, but then again, I don't worship money and have come realize that Mike Castagna is right that the Company has to use it as leverage to gain and retain industry talent. Afterall, the CEO of MannKind had a lesser salary than the total compensation of the CEO of ADA. But, that's just mytakeonit • MannKind Executive MannKind Compensation: 2016-2018• American Diabetes Association Highest Compensated Employees: 2017An activist doesn't attempt to persuade and/or manipulate someone into doing something or thinking a certain way. That's all I see coming from Michael Kovacy and others. ADA has 800 staff and revenue of more than $180 million, so larger than MNKD. However, most importantly, it gets quite poor ratings on financials (1 out of 4 stars at charitynavigator for instance) since they spend so much on overhead leaving relatively little for the work they are supposed to be doing. Many charities overpay executives and ADA is one of them. Yes, if you hunt for examples of high pay to use as anecdotes to justify higher pay for MNKD execs you can likely find examples to justify almost any extreme. Regardless of comps from the compensation companies that are paid by and work hand in glove with managements to inflate salaries industry wide, the main thing shareholders are upset with is the timing of this, when shareholders have suffered dilution and share price plunge and a much touted management initiative (TV ads) seems to have fallen far short of almost everyone's (including management) expectations.
|
|
|
Post by falconquest on May 17, 2019 6:32:47 GMT -5
This is definitely not the same. They can just wait, if the PPS depreciate, they don't exercise, if it appreciates, they exercice. No risk of downside, only potential upside. When as a shareholder you buy straight at 1.30, you are exposed to the stock dropping significantly still. ...and that's how you are rewarded as an employee who works for MNKD, ABBV, ABT, AMGN, BMO, BP, CB, CSCO, EMR, GIS, HON, INTC, JNJ, JPM, KMB, KMI, KO, LEG, LMT, MCD, MRK, MSFT, MTB, NSC, NUE, PFE, PG, PNC, PPL, QCOM, SLB, T, WFC, WM, WMT, WPC, XOM, AMD, CEF, GE, GSK, INO, BG, CPB, EBAY, KTOS, MOS, MU, NOK, NVS, ORAN, SNY, SYNA, TACO, TER, TTEK, VOD, WEN, ALC, ASLEF, CLOEF, DSTZF, FPAFY, GRCLF, GUZOF, IMBBY, MARZF, PRGAF, RBGLY, PARQF, and TBVPF. Not everyone of these companies I own are flush with cash, have low P/E's, carry no levels of risk, have low BETA's, have no exposure to macro-global events, or make a profit every quarter or year...yet. But, I can tell you that at one point or another, the C-Suite employees of these same listed companies are compensated just like MNKD employees. As an employee of a company you can be awarded shares. As a non-employee, you are not awarded shares. That's how it works. While the risk is much different, it's designed to be. No, these are not ETFS or Mutual Funds. I out right have stock in every single one of these. What, no AVXL?
|
|
bkdmd
Researcher
Posts: 79
|
Post by bkdmd on May 17, 2019 8:06:11 GMT -5
It is easy to be an executive of a wall street company or a politician. Neither take responsibility or are willing to be held accountable. Both will take more whenever they can. And neither care about those paying the bills..... They just ask us for more and take more regardless of the results they produce. The only thing politicians and CEOs of public traded companies are good at is making excuses.
It is easy to spend other people's money...especially when you are getting rich taking it.
|
|
|
Post by boca1girl on May 17, 2019 8:21:42 GMT -5
It is easy to be an executive of a wall street company or a politician. Neither take responsibility or are willing to be held accountable. Both will take more whenever they can. And neither care about those paying the bills..... They just ask us for more and take more regardless of the results they produce. The only thing politicians and CEOs of public traded companies are good at is making excuses. It is easy to spend other people's money...especially when you are getting rich taking it. For the most part you are right! We all have a choice, to invest in publicly traded companies or not. Stock options and compensation are part of the equation. They are awarded by the compensation committee based on comparables. We all need to decide if we want to take the risk and potentially prosper along side management. They have to do the work to make the company a success. If they fail, none of us will reap the rewards. Many in Silicon Valley got nothing from their stock options after the 2000 bubble burst. Microsoft made many millionaires. I doubt they hold a grudge against Gates and Balmer for their financial success.
|
|