|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 18:11:18 GMT -5
Post by olebob1 on May 17, 2019 18:11:18 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. Mango, Please restate the part about Derek LeRoith MD, PHD, who is currently a member of the MannKind Scientific Advisor Board and was/is Chief Editor of a major medical journal. Some may have missed this important information. There were a lot of other things in your message. Thanks!
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 18:38:07 GMT -5
Post by wgreystone on May 17, 2019 18:38:07 GMT -5
At my last company, I got a ton of options to stay around. They went bankrupt within the year... Managements on the clock. The beauty of gifted stock options, if they become worthless you can just walk away, unlike actual shareholders... Honestly, the value of these options is not outrageous for C-level executives.
|
|
|
Post by mango on May 17, 2019 18:39:55 GMT -5
That's fine, let's go— NVAX just had to do a one-for-twenty reverse stock split and their revenue for 2018 was $34.3 million. CEO of NVAX base salary for 2018: $642,720. CEO of NVAX total compensation for 2018: $4,158,398 If you would look at the Peer Data MannKind used for 2018 and 2019 Executive Compensation then you would see that some companies had a net revenue of less than $20M or barely over $20M. Wonder what those CEOs' salaries and total comp are? Well, here's one example: Arena Pharmaceuticals CEO base salary for 2017: $620,00 Arena Pharmaceuticals CEO total compensation for 2017: $2,915,945 Arena Pharmaceuticals full-year 2017 revenues totaled: $21.3 million. Lowest paid Arena Pharmaceutical Executive Officer for 2017: $400,000 Lowest total compensation for an Arena Pharmaceutical Executive Officer for 2017: $1,599,325 I am looking forward to your response that will hopefully explain to me why and how there is any logic in your argument against why MannKind Executives' salaries and compensations are not justified (even though they are certainly less than these two examples). See, these are far more relevant comparisons. And I never said MannKind's current salaries/compensations are not justified, I took issue with your argument defending the raise/bonuses for the reason I listed above. It was not a valid comparison. Novavax has been a disaster, so probably not a company that you want to mimic. Also, their market cap at the end of 2018 was around 750M, so around 2-3x of what MannKind was at the time. Arena is doing much better, their market cap is 2.68B and has been consistently growing since 2017. They also negotiated a deal in 2018 with UTHR for an upfront payment of 800M with the potential to go up to 1.2B along with double digit royalties. So yeah, I think their management team did pretty well. Instead of acknowledging the fact that Arena did a 1-for-10 reverse stock split in June 2017 due to their stock price hanging below $1 dollar, you diverted from that and talked about information that is irrelevant to the data I provided. Arena was included in the Peer Data FOR MannKind's 2018 executive salaries and comps—Arena was and still is a nothing burger and highlighting something that happened in 2018 is not relevant to those data since it occurred in 2018, a year that didn't exist yet. MannKind has physical value because they have an FDA approved product. They also have an scientific IP portfolio of physical value because a lot of it is connected to Afrezza. Arena has nothing. Arena might have some cash but they have absolutely nothing of physical value to justify their PPS. Money won't treat your PAH, but TreT will. Why did I mention the word illegal? Put simply—I am unable to make sense of and understand your persistence with this issue being ONLY something you personally dislike and disagree with. I can't understand why someone would spend so much time and energy on something so insignificant. I can only wonder if it is to persuade and manipulate others. 😉
|
|
|
Post by ktim on May 17, 2019 18:40:14 GMT -5
RSUs are totally free to the employee and will have some value unless the company goes under. Stock options may or may not have value to the employee in the future. In either case, the employee wins big if the stock moves up. All I want to do is hang on to their shirt tails and go along for the ride up. If investors are that upset about standard practices of publicly traded companies, or MNKD in particular, they should not be investors. Or they should be contacting the proper chain of command, such as one of 3 Letter agencies or in this case, the SEC and the DOJ. I know from experience that if you are 100% certain of illegal practices and have verifiable proof, irrefutable evidence, then someone in one of these regulatory arms is going to react and will certainly do so if you actually have something that opens them up to ethical and professional accountability and/or state and federal laws. Unless MannKind is participating in illegal activities, then people are merely using management as a punching bag and whining about nothing significant or of substance. Hell, there is attorneys on the board that know this. MannKind is certainly one of the most ethical pharma companies out there and for sure do not make more than even those are NVAX and Arena. How are people that invested in NVAX not more upset with what is happening over there? Have you seen the CEO's salary and total compensation? Good god, it drowns Mike Castagna's and that company is not even close to being in MannKind's level—in any way. You can't just make unsubstantiated allegations with no evidence supporting it. Show some irrefutable evidence that shows me this is illegal. If there isn't any then I can't believe why someone would waste months of time and energy over personal feelings. You could have been contacting state and local law makers, the SEC, the DOJ, your governor, etc... Amazing what money can do to people! I'll put you on the list of investors I want for my next venture... anything and everything I do will be perfectly acceptable as long as it's not illegal? Woohoo. To heck with ASM in NYC... Paris here we come. Michelin starred lunch room. It's not illegal, right? You'd be cool if Mike decided to get a corporate jet? I find it hard to believe you really think shareholders have no right to complain unless something is illegal. We are owners of this company. Management are employees hired to manage the operation. Any owners of companies should be concerned with how the employees are performing. Obviously lack of criminal behavior is not the standard that should be applied.
|
|
|
Post by mango on May 17, 2019 18:51:00 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. Mango, Please restate the part about Derek LeRoith MD, PHD, who is currently a member of the MannKind Scientific Advisor Board and was/is Chief Editor of a major medical journal. Some may have missed this important information. There were a lot of other things in your message. Thanks! I think u just did!
|
|
|
Post by ktim on May 17, 2019 18:58:58 GMT -5
The beauty of gifted stock options, if they become worthless you can just walk away, unlike actual shareholders... Honestly, the value of these options is not outrageous for C-level executives. Can't argue with that generalized statement. If MNKD were profitable I'd be glad to provide that to them, but conversely, given it comes on the heels of dilution and missing management set expectations recently, to me it's understandable shareholders are upset. I wouldn't necessarily pick the adjective "outrageous" for the raise and options, but I might pick "really disappointing choices" and "confidence eroding". This stock is particularly volatile in part because of management's lack of candor and poor track record with setting/managing investor expectations. To turn around and take advantage of that volatility to award quite large amounts of stock after a plunge in price is bad optics and leaves a bad taste. I hate to appear so cynical, but quite frankly, it can be very lucrative for managements to allow this sort of share price volatility if they take advantage by loading themselves up on low strike options opportunistically. There have been companies that got in trouble for that, by doing it too blatantly, but there is certainly a lot of room to get away with it without crossing over into actionable wrongdoing. It can still smell bad.
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on May 17, 2019 19:26:03 GMT -5
ktm, I generally try to stay out of the discusssion on the overall quality of leadership and why they can't seem to get scripts up as fast as we would all like. I have actually talked to doctors before, (Cedars Sinai, City of Hope, UCLA, Several Clinics, Private Practice, etc...) and with those I have personal relationships with I have had success (over time) but with those I have not, Afrezza has been met with great skepticism including one endo I would considered to be one of the top 10 in the country if not the world. Another Endo from UCLA told me in response to my telling him that he could get T1's into a range of 5.5 to 6.2 on Afrezza with few if any hypos that he thought I was lying to him. So yes they are hesistant to believe and quite skeptical. (This was about 2 to 3 years ago.)
The personal relationships allowed me over time to send info pieces, follow up and gradually have them try on one or two patients and then more. Unfortunately, I did not get the time with those that I did not have personal relationships with beyond the first or second conversations.
However, I have to agree that a lack of communication and transparency would better help the mood of many investors who feel that we have been left in the dark about our investment and make decisions about what to do with a lack of information. I am speifically talking about some of the following:
1. Expectations for break even on revenue not just Afrezza, but if also includes Trep T 2. Status of Brazil 3. Revised India timeline 4. Expected dates to file EU, Britain, Canada and Mexico 5. Status on DTC and Eagle Pharmacy 6. Status on what publications and when 7. Status on partner opportunities 8. New (outside) molecule 9. Expectations for RLS (not just will have more later this year) 10. Marketing Plan for next 12 months: social, events, commercials 11. Discussions on SOC conversations and expectations
I am sure there is more that I have not listed but I think you get the idea. I accept that this will take time, however I would like to see the transparency we were promised when MC took over. Overall he is likely doing as good a job as one can under the circumstances but given the situation that many find themselves in, I think we would all feel a bit better with more information. I do realize there may be some things that can't be discussed and that is fine if we are told just that, as other discussions may be taking place. But one of the most important discussions for me at the moment is the one mnkd has with its shareholders.
|
|
|
Post by radgray68 on May 17, 2019 20:22:29 GMT -5
Most of the “transparency” you guys are asking for are current unknowables even to management (dates for ex-us filings, partnership plans etc.) I mean, I’m sure they may have an idea of the timeframe but to opine publicly on ANYTHING before finalizing the agreements opens us up to 100,000 slime ball attorneys just praying for a misstatement. I know we all want answers but the lawyers flat out ruined that level of transparency. I say this as a former liability claims examiner of 10 years. Believe me, I’d love to know the answers all your questions, I have them myself. However, it just ain’t going to happen on most of them until it happens. Sorry guys.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 20:44:48 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by mannmade on May 17, 2019 20:44:48 GMT -5
Not specific dates time frames
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 17, 2019 21:27:11 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by radgray68 on May 17, 2019 21:27:11 GMT -5
Not specific dates time frames Understood. But lets say ongoing discussions lead Mike to believe we will file EU and Canada ourselves in 2H 2019, but before we file, in October or November say, talks turn serious with a potential partner who will do it for us, that deal would put filing on hold until that agreement is hammered out, likely several months. He has then “egregiously lied to shareholders and mislead poor investors causing irreparable harm... blah blah blah” as the lawyers would claim. The evil of holding shareholders “in the dark” is far less harmful to the company than full disclosure on what are essentially fluid timelines until they’re not. Just one small example, but unfortunately you have to look at it through the lens of a hungry, ambitious ambulance chaser. It’s playing to the lowest common denominator but it’s far safer that way.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 18, 2019 7:04:51 GMT -5
Post by hellodolly on May 18, 2019 7:04:51 GMT -5
Most of the “transparency” you guys are asking for are current unknowables even to management (dates for ex-us filings, partnership plans etc.) I mean, I’m sure they may have an idea of the timeframe but to opine publicly on ANYTHING before finalizing the agreements opens us up to 100,000 slime ball attorneys just praying for a misstatement. I know we all want answers but the lawyers flat out ruined that level of transparency. I say this as a former liability claims examiner of 10 years. Believe me, I’d love to know the answers all your questions, I have them myself. However, it just ain’t going to happen on most of them until it happens. Sorry guys. Defined as "Known Variables" in the strategic planning model. They already know that dates for ex-us fillings are out of their hands so they can only take a 'best guess case scenario' for their answers. Even the request by India to do additional studies is a 'known variable', or at least they should have planned for the "what if". As opposed to "Unknown Variables" that come out of the blue...from nowhere land.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on May 18, 2019 7:23:12 GMT -5
Help me here. Isn't "filing" the application for marketing approval with regulatory agencies in foreign countries? Certainly the date of approval may be unknowable but certain not the month you plan to file.
In early 2018 CEO Castagna clearly stated that by the end of 2018 MannKind planned to have Afrezza filings in countries that, when combined, would represent more than 50% of the global diabetes population. USA, India and Brazil only account for roughly 38%. It's fair to say that many shareholders expected a filing in China.
The CEO also is on record as saying that he preferred regional ex-US partnerships over country specific. Yet, so far, only country-specific Agreements have been penned, China/Japan/Asia not being one of them...
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on May 18, 2019 9:59:59 GMT -5
Help me here. Isn't "filing" the application for marketing approval with regulatory agencies in foreign countries? Certainly the date of approval may be unknowable but certain not the month you plan to file. In early 2018 CEO Castagna clearly stated that by the end of 2018 MannKind planned to have Afrezza filings in countries that, when combined, would represent more than 50% of the global diabetes population. USA, India and Brazil only account for roughly 38%. It's fair to say that many shareholders expected a filing in China. The CEO also is on record as saying that he preferred regional ex-US partnerships over country specific. Yet, so far, only country-specific Agreements have been penned, China/Japan/Asia not being one of them... Doesn't Amphastar have the right of first refusal in China? I wonder if that has been followed up.
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on May 18, 2019 10:07:17 GMT -5
Help me here. Isn't "filing" the application for marketing approval with regulatory agencies in foreign countries? Certainly the date of approval may be unknowable but certain not the month you plan to file. In early 2018 CEO Castagna clearly stated that by the end of 2018 MannKind planned to have Afrezza filings in countries that, when combined, would represent more than 50% of the global diabetes population. USA, India and Brazil only account for roughly 38%. It's fair to say that many shareholders expected a filing in China. The CEO also is on record as saying that he preferred regional ex-US partnerships over country specific. Yet, so far, only country-specific Agreements have been penned, China/Japan/Asia not being one of them... That was true (along with other statements) until he ran into an obstacle.
|
|
|
Forms 4
May 18, 2019 11:29:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by longliner on May 18, 2019 11:29:26 GMT -5
Order filled, I paid less than management will to exercise their options. See how easy that was! And now you have 100% of the downside risk while they have 0. I don’t think you understand the benefits of stock options. I understand perfectly. I have no doubt that MC will benefit from the upside of his newly issued options. I will trust you to worry about the down side.
|
|