|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Dec 1, 2019 0:55:01 GMT -5
Sounds like falcon has his strings wound too tight. In any case, look at the actual growth numbers in dollars and not percentage rates. Percentages can be very misleading if you are looking at multiple years. A 1,000 percent increase the first year in dollars ... can be very minuscule to a 10 percent increase in dollars in the later years. Percentages can be useful for analysis because they let you see how revenue increases compound. For example, let's assume that we close out this year with weekly revenue of about $1.5 million and assume 50% year-over-year growth for five years out. We then get $2.25 million, $3.375 million, $5.06 million, $7.6 million, and $11.4 million. Assuming the trend were to continue, that would imply annual sales in the $700-million range for the sixth year. A lot of assumptions there, of course, but not unreasonable ones based on what we've seen this year, IMHO. And you are correct. AND, you are saying the same thing that I am. Look at the dollars growth and not percentage rates. I think Monday will be very interesting. But, that's mytakeonit |
|
|
|
Post by wmdhunt on Dec 1, 2019 11:01:20 GMT -5
You are certainly not alone in this sentiment. So disappointing for so many years. Holding on is very depressing but there is little we can do here at yet another stalemate bottom.
|
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Dec 1, 2019 11:08:19 GMT -5
Percentages can be useful for analysis because they let you see how revenue increases compound. For example, let's assume that we close out this year with weekly revenue of about $1.5 million and assume 50% year-over-year growth for five years out. We then get $2.25 million, $3.375 million, $5.06 million, $7.6 million, and $11.4 million. Assuming the trend were to continue, that would imply annual sales in the $700-million range for the sixth year. A lot of assumptions there, of course, but not unreasonable ones based on what we've seen this year, IMHO. And you are correct. AND, you are saying the same thing that I am. Look at the dollars growth and not percentage rates. I think Monday will be very interesting. But, that's mytakeonit The problem with percentages is that the increase in script revenue is more from per-script price than from actual script growth. Script price increases can’t continue at this rate, so script growth must pick up. What do you predict will be interesting about Monday? |
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Dec 1, 2019 15:12:04 GMT -5
Percentages can be useful for analysis because they let you see how revenue increases compound. For example, let's assume that we close out this year with weekly revenue of about $1.5 million and assume 50% year-over-year growth for five years out. We then get $2.25 million, $3.375 million, $5.06 million, $7.6 million, and $11.4 million. Assuming the trend were to continue, that would imply annual sales in the $700-million range for the sixth year. A lot of assumptions there, of course, but not unreasonable ones based on what we've seen this year, IMHO. Given that scripts have not shown the exponential growth you are assuming, it would seem unreasonable to claim you are basing it on past performance. One can always hope that we transition from linear to exponential growth. Whether hoping for that is something that is reasonable or unreasonable, I wouldn't venture to weigh in on. Let's look at a few examples: 1/6/17 = $159,000 1/5/18 = $423,000 (gain of 166%) 1/4/19 = $789,000 (gain of 86%) 3/3/17 = $183,000 3/2/18 = $423,000 (gain of 131%) 3/1/19 = $1,040,00 (gain of 146%) 6/2/17 = $205,000 6/1/18 = $646,000 (gain of 215%) 5/31/19 = $953,000 (gain of 47%) 11/24/17 = $426,000 11/23/18 = $734,000 (gain of 72%) 11/22/19 = $1,461,000 (gain of 99%)
I didn't cherry-pick the dates. A few days ago I did a similar comparison just for 2018 to 2019 with different dates and came up with gains ranging from about 50% to a little over 100%, which is why I chose 50% for my compounding example. If I were feeling really ambitious, I would add the weeklies for each year and do full-year comparisons, but I don't think that's necessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Dec 1, 2019 15:17:50 GMT -5
And you are correct. AND, you are saying the same thing that I am. Look at the dollars growth and not percentage rates. I think Monday will be very interesting. But, that's mytakeonit The problem with percentages is that the increase in script revenue is more from per-script price than from actual script growth. Script price increases can’t continue at this rate, so script growth must pick up. Script growth from 11/23/18 to 11/22/19 was 45%. |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Dec 2, 2019 18:24:13 GMT -5
Given that scripts have not shown the exponential growth you are assuming, it would seem unreasonable to claim you are basing it on past performance. One can always hope that we transition from linear to exponential growth. Whether hoping for that is something that is reasonable or unreasonable, I wouldn't venture to weigh in on. Let's look at a few examples: 1/6/17 = $159,000 1/5/18 = $423,000 (gain of 166%) 1/4/19 = $789,000 (gain of 86%) 3/3/17 = $183,000 3/2/18 = $423,000 (gain of 131%) 3/1/19 = $1,040,00 (gain of 146%) 6/2/17 = $205,000 6/1/18 = $646,000 (gain of 215%) 5/31/19 = $953,000 (gain of 47%) 11/24/17 = $426,000 11/23/18 = $734,000 (gain of 72%) 11/22/19 = $1,461,000 (gain of 99%)
I didn't cherry-pick the dates. A few days ago I did a similar comparison just for 2018 to 2019 with different dates and came up with gains ranging from about 50% to a little over 100%, which is why I chose 50% for my compounding example. If I were feeling really ambitious, I would add the weeklies for each year and do full-year comparisons, but I don't think that's necessary.
Year by year the "percent" change is decreasing (2016 to 2017 was 385% increase), which is because the actual increase has basically been linear. Earl Grey has posted some nice graphs and other than seasonality revenue matches the straight LINE he plots... not an exponential curve. Numbers can tell a lot of false stories and claiming that revenue in the past is exponential would be such a false story. Linear is what matches the data. You might as well be pretending that we'll increase 385% each year because there was one year that was true. |
|
|
|
Post by wgreystone on Dec 2, 2019 19:14:20 GMT -5
The problem with percentages is that the increase in script revenue is more from per-script price than from actual script growth. Script price increases can’t continue at this rate, so script growth must pick up. Script growth from 11/23/18 to 11/22/19 was 45%. 11/23/18 was thanksgiving week. So it's not a fair comparison. |
|
|
|
Post by JEvans on Dec 2, 2019 19:58:54 GMT -5
Let's look at a few examples: 1/6/17 = $159,000 1/5/18 = $423,000 (gain of 166%) 1/4/19 = $789,000 (gain of 86%) 3/3/17 = $183,000 3/2/18 = $423,000 (gain of 131%) 3/1/19 = $1,040,00 (gain of 146%) 6/2/17 = $205,000 6/1/18 = $646,000 (gain of 215%) 5/31/19 = $953,000 (gain of 47%) 11/24/17 = $426,000 11/23/18 = $734,000 (gain of 72%) 11/22/19 = $1,461,000 (gain of 99%)
I didn't cherry-pick the dates. A few days ago I did a similar comparison just for 2018 to 2019 with different dates and came up with gains ranging from about 50% to a little over 100%, which is why I chose 50% for my compounding example. If I were feeling really ambitious, I would add the weeklies for each year and do full-year comparisons, but I don't think that's necessary.
Year by year the "percent" change is decreasing (2016 to 2017 was 385% increase), which is because the actual increase has basically been linear. Earl Grey has posted some nice graphs and other than seasonality revenue matches the straight LINE he plots... not an exponential curve. Numbers can tell a lot of false stories and claiming that revenue in the past is exponential would be such a false story. Linear is what matches the data. You might as well be pretending that we'll increase 385% each year because there was one year that was true. The question remains? MNKD has a webcast coming up Tuesday and I will listen to the same thing I hear every conference call......MC cheer leading! Why do I say, "cheer leading", not because I don't like Mike, but because he only has positive things to say, repeating the same cheers, and you would think....now things are going to change, but they don't. I know I'm not stupid, but how long can I be duped? I think I'm going to add some more shares... |
|
|
|
Post by ltta on Dec 2, 2019 21:07:29 GMT -5
Year by year the "percent" change is decreasing (2016 to 2017 was 385% increase), which is because the actual increase has basically been linear. Earl Grey has posted some nice graphs and other than seasonality revenue matches the straight LINE he plots... not an exponential curve. Numbers can tell a lot of false stories and claiming that revenue in the past is exponential would be such a false story. Linear is what matches the data. You might as well be pretending that we'll increase 385% each year because there was one year that was true. The question remains? MNKD has a webcast coming up Tuesday and I will listen to the same thing I hear every conference call......MC cheer leading! Why do I say, "cheer leading", not because I don't like Mike, but because he only has positive things to say, repeating the same cheers, and you would think....now things are going to change, but they don't. I know I'm not stupid, but how long can I be duped? I think I'm going to add some more shares... I do not think I'll add shares, but take a tax deduction.
Like I said in this thread....
I'm feeling extremely duped after 10 years of holding this stock.
How many times does MC say "I feel good about" (EVERYTHING MANNKIND) in every conference .... geeeezzzzeeee !
|
|
