|
Post by BD on Nov 11, 2014 16:55:32 GMT -5
Remember, GMCR had a crazy-high short ratio during the entire period from '06 to '11, including throughout the great recession, as the PPS kept going up...
|
|
|
Post by ripano on Nov 11, 2014 17:02:06 GMT -5
Institutional ownership continues to increase regardless of all the negative articles being published. it's as if its all by design to keep this stock in a trading range for accumulation and option purchases to mitigate any losses to the stock price increasing. I think we are near the end of this cycle since now Sanofi will be able to launch both advertising and sales force. All in all it has helped all of us in continuing to accumulate shares at amazing levels of discount value. This company 2 years from now will be one of the most valuable pharma stocks to own. A diabetic population that increases every year by a minimum of 10%. And we will also have much more more clarity in technosphere applications..The future is VERY bright for all of us.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Nov 11, 2014 18:29:55 GMT -5
I'm thinking the vast majority of shorts are hedging more than thinking the company will fail. However, there seems to be a number of posters who think that many shorts got stuck in the $3-$4 range when MNKD pps rose over 200%.
Increasing short interest at this point tells me that many investors think that fund managers will still be able to manipulate this into the $5's. I think the short funds are outnumbered by long funds at this point, though.
The "dreaded" bear attacks that were expected to occur after the filing didn't happen... at least not yet anyway. Perhaps they're going to lambast the company initial 2015 sales figures to prematurely label Afrezza a "failure", or point to lack of profitability over the next 2-4 quarters. Helluva risk.
I don't think short interest will vacate en masse until we have witnessed a year of steady growth. It's the past year's volatility that continues to attract shorts, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Nov 11, 2014 20:32:38 GMT -5
Daunted here as well, but holding.
Its that combination of that canned, boilerplate scare-text in the 10Q with that rising number. Something is afoot or amiss. Gotta be.
But what. And what will it mean to long retail holders. Those shorts gotta have an exit strategy.
One would hope they were engineering a squeeze bigger than VW with this. But if so, I would think they'd be quietly starting to reverse course...?
Al planning on selling his shares? Deerfield? Hard to imagine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 22:19:48 GMT -5
Well one thing we know now. The 4mil new shorts are currently holding the proverbial "bag", as the stock is up 25+% since last report.
The second thing is that it appears there are quickly becoming little/no remaining shares to short. IB shows very little, fidelity has none, tda has little to none, etc.
Third, shorts have had to fire off a lot of cost averaging to keep the stock in check in this "dead period" before launch.
Like others have mentioned, there's now a line in the sand at $6. There's no more to short, whether you want to admit it or not there's a bit more awareness of naked shorting, and nov 20 is coming. These next 5 trading days I feel are going to be wild, and I think we could see mid 5's before the smoke clears, but something has got to give.
My ultimate wish would be some amazing news out of the blue. I'm sure it won't happen, but a mass exodus would truly be an event to behold
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Nov 11, 2014 22:47:51 GMT -5
"I don't think short interest will vacate en masse until we have witnessed a year of steady growth..."
"En masse?" Geez, mnholdem, I'd be pleased with them vacating en min!
|
|
|
Post by jpg on Nov 11, 2014 23:52:02 GMT -5
Why is short interest going up a bad thing? As far as I am concerned the higher the better...
JPG
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Nov 11, 2014 23:52:21 GMT -5
The way I see it, only two or three possibilities here. One possibility is that there is a good number of shorts trapped at lower prices that simply believe Afrezza will fail and will take down Mannkind with it. If you read enough previous to adcom literature, Exubera plus the several inhale insulin projects that were abandoned, etc, and have not bother to go into detail on what makes Mannkind inhaled insulin different, I guess this makes sense. Especially when you consider the plethora of negative articles that appear still on regular basis. However, for a true long this explanation seems to be missing something.
A second possibility, as some have pointed out is that the stock is being artificially held at a certain range for whatever the reasons. Accumulation would seem the most obvious one. There might be some credit to this, given that institutional ownership has been growing slowly but steadily.
Obviously, I do not believe that shorts have any secret info or knowledge that makes them any more certain about the failure of the company than we have and convince us on the success of it. However,a third and most likely possibility is simply that shorts believe that even if Afrezza is successful, this will not happen overnight and might take considerably longer than what longs believe. As a long, this strategy seems to be overly exposed to risk, but that is only because we tend to think the upward move will happen sooner than later. Once again if you are convinced of the resistance of doctors and insurance to adopt new medication, the shorts strategy would seem to make sense.
I probably believe the future lies somewhere in between. Obviously, I am a firm believer in Mannkind's product and it's blockbuster possibilities, but I also have to recognize that I have not seen much that would indicate the company, either Mannkind or Sanofi, expect this to be an easy hole in one. If they believe it, they sure are keeping it under wraps. That is not to say both, Mannkind and Sanofi, do not believe that Afrezza will eventually be huge, but when it comes to share price the timeline is crucial and, honestly, my initial enthusiasm is been curved by the reality of events since ADCOM.
The way I see it, the upside of my being wrong would actually be the real possibility of a short squeeze. If I am right, us longs will eventually make plenty of money in our investment, but we still might have some turbulence ahead of us.
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Nov 11, 2014 23:55:18 GMT -5
Why is short interest going up a bad thing? As far as I am concerned the higher the better... JPG I tend to agree. I do not think is a bad thing. If you are a true believer, the higher it goes and the smaller the availability of shares the better. i guess many long term investors try to understand why shorts do not share what they consider the absolute obvious outcome for Mannkind.
|
|
|
Post by jpg on Nov 12, 2014 0:25:45 GMT -5
Why is short interest going up a bad thing? As far as I am concerned the higher the better... JPG I tend to agree. I do not think is a bad thing. If you are a true believer, the higher it goes and the smaller the availability of shares the better. i guess many long term investors try to understand why shorts do not share what they consider the absolute obvious outcome for Mannkind. Yes trying to understand the shorts (and everyone else's) perspective is always wise. It's just I am confident they are wrong and am 'betting'/ investing against them in a zero sums game (zero sums from a long short perspective). Short interest reporting is retrospective. A 2 weeks lag makes for a very big difference when 'fantom shares' are traded back and forth in microseconds. Days to cover are meaningless. You can't cover with phantom share but you can trade them back and forth all day. The perception that shorts make out (or are) better then longs is probably wrong. Maybe biotech is a bit different but I don't feel in the slightest intimidated by rising short interest. On the contrary. The higher the better. I added in the low 5$ range and will add some more if I have another chance. Time is on our side. JPG
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Nov 12, 2014 0:35:52 GMT -5
For the things that don't connect:
1. How can short interest be going up? There's tute accumulation, and reduction of shares to short. So where are these shares coming from? More NSS? Or are they getting loaned by the accumulating tutes? Or Deerfield, or?
2. If you were a HF or such, wouldn't you DD with millions of dollars and your company rep at risk? AKA: Read the Adcom result before shorting more assuming it to be the same as Exubera?
3. If those shorts are trapped under $3-$4, why in GADS-Earth would they dig the hole deeper if they really just wanted out? I get the raid strategy, but only makes sense if they actually churn during the flash crash, etc - and not do the opposite.
At least with the VW squeeze, there was a surprise element there. The plan we're waiting for, or the potential we're watching for - are all known factors. No surprise.
So what gives. Its hard to believe that much money, from different sources, are just making a simple, bad call. One big investor - even two - sure....
Kinda remind me of that TV ad with the idiot people running into the shed of saws instead of jumping in the car when the psycho-murderer is following them ...... "Great! Saws!"
The scary part in dark days I ponder is - who is the psycho, and who is the idiot.
Mnholdem - regarding lambast - could be. They could be looking at EOY sell-off immediately followed by initial uncertain/lack luster results in Q1 as another quarter of play on this to drive down further - so feeling safe to 'short away'.
Sigh.
|
|
|
Post by vissertrades on Nov 12, 2014 8:44:57 GMT -5
I'm thinking this is option/MM manipulation. Shorts can cover with future calls too and I think this takes some of the pop out of a squeeze. MM accumulates for return of shares could account for price rise in the face of more shorting. Remember OpionsExpress MM was caught tweaking MNKD shares!
|
|
|
Post by obamayoumama on Nov 12, 2014 20:27:08 GMT -5
For the things that don't connect: 1. How can short interest be going up? There's tute accumulation, and reduction of shares to short. So where are these shares coming from? More NSS? Or are they getting loaned by the accumulating tutes? Or Deerfield, or? 2. If you were a HF or such, wouldn't you DD with millions of dollars and your company rep at risk? AKA: Read the Adcom result before shorting more assuming it to be the same as Exubera? 3. If those shorts are trapped under $3-$4, why in GADS-Earth would they dig the hole deeper if they really just wanted out? I get the raid strategy, but only makes sense if they actually churn during the flash crash, etc - and not do the opposite. At least with the VW squeeze, there was a surprise element there. The plan we're waiting for, or the potential we're watching for - are all known factors. No surprise. So what gives. Its hard to believe that much money, from different sources, are just making a simple, bad call. One big investor - even two - sure.... Kinda remind me of that TV ad with the idiot people running into the shed of saws instead of jumping in the car when the psycho-murderer is following them ...... "Great! Saws!" The scary part in dark days I ponder is - who is the psycho, and who is the idiot. Mnholdem - regarding lambast - could be. They could be looking at EOY sell-off immediately followed by initial uncertain/lack luster results in Q1 as another quarter of play on this to drive down further - so feeling safe to 'short away'. Sigh. I believe that institutions are allowing shorts to barrow their shares. Getting a 10%+ interest from the shorts has to be enticing for a mutual fund that believes in MNKD.
|
|
|
Post by kc on Nov 12, 2014 20:44:29 GMT -5
You are probably correct. That makes the most sense. They win and get paid.
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Nov 13, 2014 2:14:24 GMT -5
Hmmm. Win-win all around. Shorts making money bouncing it back n forth. Tutes interest from the shorts bouncing it back n forth. And tutes make money in the end when it goes up. So - are there enough retail suckers tho to move these numbers? Or is this an effectively, self-sufficient engine? Who's the sucker?
|
|