|
Post by gamblerjag on Aug 27, 2019 18:08:42 GMT -5
again why are people worrying about getting to pre split pps of $55 that will not happen for many many years. that's 11 bill m/c.. we did not have a m/c of 11 bill in 2014.. For comparability we need to get to pre split market cap of $22 buck or so.. so we can compare logically.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Aug 27, 2019 21:51:23 GMT -5
again why are people worrying about getting to pre split pps of $55 that will not happen for many many years. that's 11 bill m/c.. we did not have a m/c of 11 bill in 2014.. For comparability we need to get to pre split market cap of $22 buck or so.. so we can compare logically. It depends what one wants to compare. People may be interested in knowing how long until they break even. Or come close to breaking even. For that, people look to the share price, not the market cap.
|
|
|
Post by gamblerjag on Aug 27, 2019 22:32:35 GMT -5
again why are people worrying about getting to pre split pps of $55 that will not happen for many many years. that's 11 bill m/c.. we did not have a m/c of 11 bill in 2014.. For comparability we need to get to pre split market cap of $22 buck or so.. so we can compare logically. It depends what one wants to compare. People may be interested in knowing how long until they break even. Or come close to breaking even. For that, people look to the share price, not the market cap. That is true.
|
|
|
Post by rickf on Aug 28, 2019 6:50:56 GMT -5
It depends what one wants to compare. People may be interested in knowing how long until they break even. Or come close to breaking even. For that, people look to the share price, not the market cap. That is true. Good Morning - mnk is correct - for me - it is all about sp - again - I take full responsibility for risking what I did but I did truly believe in this product and Al Mann. So - what have I learned - you can have the absolute best product but as the old adage goes - if you dont have sales you dont have anything! I, perhaps like others here, do not really understand market cap and other "numbers" and I DO appreciate the folks here that help us neophytes. For me - I am so far underwater that anything even close to the presplit level would help me out dramatically. Don't mean to be a "Debbie downer" but I suspect that I am not the only shareholder in this stupid position. And on that note - I return to my praying for this company to survive and flourish! Happy Wednesday to all.
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Aug 28, 2019 6:59:01 GMT -5
3b market cap $18 give or take. 18 months give or take. JMHO But of course certain things have to happen to see that...
|
|
|
Post by casualinvestor on Aug 28, 2019 9:57:18 GMT -5
I realize that some (many?) people here bought at a very high price around the time of approval and Sanofi release. But that was a "pumped up" price, and not a realistic target. Without any pumping, we'd have to base PPS on income. A realistic Afrezza income target is x% of market share. 1% of total Humalog and Novolog sales is a realistic range for x (latest sales stats from OOG in january are ~320k/week of scripts). But that would translate into a very optimistic 5x our current sales, so maybe not near-term realistic, but definitely achievable. What keeps me in is that just getting crumbs of the "insulin pie" is enough to turn MNKD very profitable.
A realistic TrepT income target for next year also exists via expected market size and share. Throwing around the $400M market and getting 10% of that per year would be a huge revenue bump.
2x current Afrezza sales + $40M/year from TrepT is a reasonable 1.5 year target. Does anyone who knows this stuff better than I care to do some P/E calculations on ~100M gross revenue with 40M net revenue tacked on? What's the PPS of a company like that?
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Aug 28, 2019 13:59:21 GMT -5
My first share cost me $19. I obviously bought at the wrong time🤣 In fact there has really never been a right time to buy this stock...except for now ..and I’m basing that on Vdex and United therapeutics.
In 09 I got lucky because almost every stock I bought I was buying at the right time:-) That trade seems about over. Time to hide in little old MNKD.
|
|
|
Post by figglebird on Aug 28, 2019 16:00:54 GMT -5
Btw - right now 3b would be closer to 15$ a share - currently we are at 200m shares - w a near term max share capped at 228m
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Aug 28, 2019 16:10:34 GMT -5
... A realistic TrepT income target for next year also exists via expected market size and share. Throwing around the $400M market and getting 10% of that per year would be a huge revenue bump. 2x current Afrezza sales + $40M/year from TrepT is a reasonable 1.5 year target. Does anyone who knows this stuff better than I care to do some P/E calculations on ~100M gross revenue with 40M net revenue tacked on? What's the PPS of a company like that? What you want is the revenue for Afrezza after after COG and rebates, the gross profit. Last quarter that was $1.7M. Lets assume sales double, that would be $3.4M per quarter, or about $13.6M per year. If we get $40M from TrepT that makes $54M revenue. Now look at the S&GA which was $16M last quarter (down from $21M which was quite impressive) and we have $64M in cost. In other words there is a $10M loss, or a negative P/E. In reality there will be other revenue streams from R&D and licensing which should more than cover that deficit and produce a profit. The point though is that the P/E will be low because the profit is low.
|
|
|
Post by figglebird on Aug 28, 2019 16:31:53 GMT -5
low profit aside, the question surrounding mnkd is what will the dpi trend be... in 10 years.
It may continue on, as it is, slow to no growth outside of asthma and copd ...
but in the case of Tyvasso youve got a completely different patient/customer base built in - immediately transitioning onto technosphere...
How many brand or even generic Medications currently administered via a nuebalizer are there?
Where transitioning to a dpi makes sense?
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Aug 28, 2019 16:43:38 GMT -5
I realize that some (many?) people here bought at a very high price around the time of approval and Sanofi release. But that was a "pumped up" price, and not a realistic target. Without any pumping, we'd have to base PPS on income. A realistic Afrezza income target is x% of market share. 1% of total Humalog and Novolog sales is a realistic range for x (latest sales stats from OOG in january are ~320k/week of scripts). But that would translate into a very optimistic 5x our current sales, so maybe not near-term realistic, but definitely achievable. What keeps me in is that just getting crumbs of the "insulin pie" is enough to turn MNKD very profitable. A realistic TrepT income target for next year also exists via expected market size and share. Throwing around the $400M market and getting 10% of that per year would be a huge revenue bump. 2x current Afrezza sales + $40M/year from TrepT is a reasonable 1.5 year target. Does anyone who knows this stuff better than I care to do some P/E calculations on ~100M gross revenue with 40M net revenue tacked on? What's the PPS of a company like that? I guess earnings and then apply P/E ratio. Given COGS and S&A costs, your scenario is probably about break-even or perhaps modestly profitable. P/E ratio for profitable BP stocks is a large range. PE for a BP on the rise with a blockbuster drug can be 70 but it's uncommon to say the least.
I haven't researched BP P/E in a few years (no need), but Investopedia reports the average P/E across the board is 20x to 25x earnings. This means buyers pay $20 to $25 for every dollar of earnings. If you have 10 cents earning per share, then you're looking at $2 to $2.50 PPS. (Because at 10 cents a share it takes 10 shares to get to $1 of earnings.)
In your scenario, modest earnings above break even might be $5M to $10M. Depending on where the PE lands, that will get you below or in the neighborhood of the current PPS (using market average PE and not accounting for predatory shorting).
Have Afrezza go viral with rapid uptick in sales, and the PE is going to move towards that 70 number (but no way of knowing how close). Turn in $100M in earnings with 200M shares and a PE of 40 and the PPS is $20 (or thereabouts).
Sorry for such a sloppy explanation, but there's quite a bit of slop involved in using PE ratios to predict PPS. They are based on facts and historical information for market segments so they at least give you a ballpark view of what reality should look like in the absence of weird crap.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Aug 28, 2019 16:49:51 GMT -5
... A realistic TrepT income target for next year also exists via expected market size and share. Throwing around the $400M market and getting 10% of that per year would be a huge revenue bump. 2x current Afrezza sales + $40M/year from TrepT is a reasonable 1.5 year target. Does anyone who knows this stuff better than I care to do some P/E calculations on ~100M gross revenue with 40M net revenue tacked on? What's the PPS of a company like that? What you want is the revenue for Afrezza after after COG and rebates, the gross profit. Last quarter that was $1.7M. Lets assume sales double, that would be $3.4M per quarter, or about $13.6M per year. If we get $40M from TrepT that makes $54M revenue. Now look at the S&GA which was $16M last quarter (down from $21M which was quite impressive) and we have $64M in cost. In other words there is a $10M loss, or a negative P/E. In reality there will be other revenue streams from R&D and licensing which should more than cover that deficit and produce a profit. The point though is that the P/E will be low because the profit is low. Agree with everything although curious if your COGS estimate is linear. It won't be. That's part of (er, the main?) benefit of Brazil, and later India is overall reduction in COGS per unit. At low sales, COGS is probably nearly linear so you may be right enough.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 28, 2019 17:03:04 GMT -5
That would mean a helluva lot of net profit if Afrezza were selling in the US. Of course, management will take full advantage of hyping the improved margin to gloss over lackluster sales.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Aug 28, 2019 17:52:16 GMT -5
There's a reason they call gain/loss the bottom line. :-)
|
|
|
Post by radgray68 on Aug 28, 2019 20:50:39 GMT -5
What you want is the revenue for Afrezza after after COG and rebates, the gross profit. Last quarter that was $1.7M. Lets assume sales double, that would be $3.4M per quarter, or about $13.6M per year. If we get $40M from TrepT that makes $54M revenue. Now look at the S&GA which was $16M last quarter (down from $21M which was quite impressive) and we have $64M in cost. In other words there is a $10M loss, or a negative P/E. In reality there will be other revenue streams from R&D and licensing which should more than cover that deficit and produce a profit. The point though is that the P/E will be low because the profit is low. Agree with everything although curious if your COGS estimate is linear. It won't be. That's part of (er, the main?) benefit of Brazil, and later India is overall reduction in COGS per unit. At low sales, COGS is probably nearly linear so you may be right enough. I've heard some use 5.5 x sales as a general valuation. I take that to include royalties, and collaborations. Using an example from this thread, where we might have $100 mil in actual Afrezza sales with another $40 million in Tre-T income, I'd use 5.5 x $140 mil = 770 mil. / 200 mil. shares = $3.85/share. Doesn't sound like much but from $1.09 today to $3.85 in 2 years is an 88% CAGR. I'd be alright with it. All of this is, of course, back-of-the-napkin math, but we do all have the time.
|
|